Nastran 2013 Doc Embedded Fatigue

MSC Nastran 2013
Nastran Embedded Fatigue

Users Guide
Main Index
Worldwide Web
www.mscsoftware.com
Disclaimer
MSC.Software Corporation reserves the right to make changes in specifications and other information contained
in this document without prior notice.
The concepts, methods, and examples presented in this text are for illustrative and educational purposes only,
and are not intended to be exhaustive or to apply to any particular engineering problem or design. MSC.Software
Corporation assumes no liability or responsibility to any person or company for direct or indirect damages resulting
from the use of any information contained herein.
User Documentation: Copyright
2013 MSC.Software Corporation. Portions, copyright HBM United Kingdom
Ltd 2013. Printed in U.S.A. All Rights Reserved.
This notice shall be marked on any reproduction of this documentation, in whole or in part. Any reproduction or
distribution of this document, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of MSC.Software Corporation is
prohibited.
This software may contain certain third-party software that is protected by copyright and licensed from
MSC.Software suppliers.
MSC, MD, Dytran, Marc, MSC Nastran, MD Nastran, MSC Patran, MD Patran, OpenFSI, the MSC.Software
corporate logo, and Simulating Reality are trademarks or registered trademarks of the MSC.Software Corporation
in the United States and/or other countries.
NASTRAN is a registered trademark of NASA. PAMCRASH is a trademark or registered trademark of ESI Group.
SAMCEF is a trademark or registered trademark of Samtech SA. LS-DYNA is a trademark or registered trademark
of Livermore Software Technology Corporation. ANSYS is a registered trademark of SAS IP, Inc., a wholly owned
subsidiary of ANSYS Inc. ABAQUS is a registered trademark of ABAQUS Inc. All other brand names, product
names or trademarks belong to their respective owners. PCGLSS 6.0, Copyright 1992-2005, Computational
Applications and System Integration Inc. All rights reserved. PCGLSS 6.0 is licensed from Computational
Applications and System Integration Inc. METIS is copyrighted by the regents of the University of Minnesota. A
copy of the METIS product documentation is included with this installation. Please see "A Fast and High Quality
Multilevel Scheme for Partitioning Irregular Graphs". George Karypis and Vipin Kumar. SIAM Journal on Scientific
Computing, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 359-392, 1999.
Revision 0. June 3, 2013
NA:V2013:Z:Z:FATIGUE:DC-USR-PDF
Corporate Europe Asia Pacific
MSC.Software Corporation
2 MacArthur Place
Santa Ana, CA 92707
Telephone: (800) 345-2078
FAX: (714) 784-4056
MSC.Software GmbH
Am Moosfeld 13
81829 Munich
GERMANY
Telephone: (49) (89) 43 19 87 0
Fax: (49) (89) 43 61 71 6
Asia Pacific
MSC.Software Japan Ltd.
Shinjuku First West 8F
23-7 Nishi Shinjuku
1-Chome, Shinjuku-Ku
Tokyo 160-0023, JAPAN
Telephone: 0120-924-832 (toll
free, Japan only)
Mobile phone: 03-6911-1222
Fax: (81) (3)-6911-1201
Main Index
Cont ent s
MSC NASTRAN Embedded Fatigue Users Guide

Preface
About this Book viii
Acknowledgements ix
List of Nastran Books x
Technical Support xi
Internet Resources xii
1 Fundamentals of Fatigue Analysis
Overview 2
What is Fatigue? 3
The Fatigue Analysis Five Box Trick 4
Life Prediction Methods 6
Finite Element Analysis Methods 7
Design Philosophies 8
Life Estimation Process 10
When to Use Which Method 11
2 Introduction to User Interface
Overview 14
FATIGUE Case Control 16
Fatigue Element Definitions 19
Fatigue Parameters 30
MSC NASTRAN
Embedded Fatigue
Users Guide
Main Index

iv
Fatigue Loading 35
Analysis Model Units 44
Fatigue Optimization 46
Tips for Optimizing Performance 50
3 A Simple S-N Analysis
Problem Description 52
Fatigue Setup 54
Concluding Remarks 65
Patran Setup 72
4 Rainflow Cycle Counting
Fatigue Setup 82
Patran Setup 93
5 A Simple e-N Analysis
Fatigue Setup 100
Patran Setup 120
6 Multiple Loading
Fatigue Setup 128
Main Index
v CONTENTS
Patran Setup 135
7 A Simple Duty Cycle
Fatigue Setup 146
Patran Setup 154
8 Modal Transient Analysis
Quasi-static Method 162
Modal Transient Method 166
Modal Method 171
Patran Setup 178
9 Design Optimization
Fatigue Setup 193
A Utilities
Overview 2
Descriptions 3
B Glossary of Terms
Glossary of Terms 10
Main Index

vi
C References and Further Reading
References 84
Further Reading 90
Main Index
Preface
About this Book
Acknowledgements
List of Nastran Books
Technical Support
Internet Resources
Main Index
MSC Nastran Embedded Fatigue Users Guide
About this Book
viii
About this Book
The MSC Nastran Embedded Fatigue Users Guide is a guide to the proper use of MSC Nastran for
solving various fatigue analysis problems. This guide serves as both an introduction to fatigue analysis
for the new user and a reference for the experienced user. The major emphasis focuses on understanding
the physical processes in fatigue and properly applying MSC Nastran to model the fatigue processes
while restricting mathematical derivations to a minimum.
The basic types of fatigue analysis capabilities available in MSC Nastran are described in this guide.
These common fatigue analysis capabilities include stress-life (S-N), sometimes referred to as total life,
and strain-life (c-N), more commonly know as crack initiation, and how to apply these using statics,
normal modes and, modal transient response analyses. These capabilities are described and illustrative
examples are presented. Theory used in fatigue analysis is presented only as it pertains to the proper
understanding of the use of each capability.
To effectively use this guide, it is important for you to be familiar with MSC Nastrans static and/or
dynamic analysis capabilities and the principles of static and/or dynamic analysis. Basic finite element
modeling and analysis techniques are covered only as they pertain to MSC Nastran fatigue analysis. For
more information on static and dynamic analysis and modeling, refer to the MSC Nastran Linear Static
Analysis Users Guide, the MSC Nastran Dynamic Analysis Users Guide, and to the Getting Started with
MSC Nastran Users Guide.
This guide contains many highlighted links (in blue) to other MSC Nastran documents and all the
documents were delivered together as a collection. If you keep the collection together the links between
documents will work. Two suggestions when working with links are 1) returns you back in the
window your mouse is in and 2) you can open the other linked to document in a new window from an
Adobe Reader by choosing Open cross-document links in the same
window; then you would uncheck the and select OK.
alt
Preferences Documents

Main Index
ix
CHAPTER
Preface
Acknowledgements
The 2013 Version of the MSC Nastran Embedded Fatigue Users Guide is part of an ongoing project to
update, consolidate and improve MSC Nastran documentation. The primary editors of this guide include
Dr. Neil Bishop, Dr. Marco Veltri, Dr Erwin Johnson, Mr Joe Griffin, Mr. Gopal Nagendra, and Dr
Xiaoming Yu.
This guide incorporates all capabilities related to fatigue analysis into one place except the description
of each releases capabilities in the Release Guides and quick and direct access to fatigue related case
control and bulk data in the MSC Nastran Quick Reference Guide (QRG).
The editor is grateful to Mr. Don Truitt for his patience and dedication in updating this users guide. The
editor would also like to thank Dr. Tim Kuhlmann, Dr. Ted Wertheimer, Mr. David Turner, and Ms
Martina Coutrier for their technical review of this guide.
This fatigue capability is jointly developed in close cooperation between MSC.Software and its fatigue
technology partner, HBM-nCode. Portions of this manual are copyright HBM United Kingdom Ltd
2013.
Alan K. Caserio
Main Index
x
Below is a list of some of the Nastran documents. You may find any of these documents from
MSC.Software at www.simcompanion.mscsoftware.com.
Installation and Release Guides
Installation and Operations Guide
Release Guide
Guides
Reference Books
Quick Reference Guide
DMAP Programmers Guide
Reference Manual
Users Guides
Getting Started
Linear Static Analysis
Dynamic Analysis
Embedded Fatigue
Thermal Analysis
Superelements
MSC Demonstration Problems
Design Sensitivity and Optimization
Implicit Nonlinear (SOL 600)
Explicit Nonlinear (SOL 700)
Aeroelastic Analysis
User Defined Services
Main Index
xi
CHAPTER
Preface
Technical Support
For technical support phone numbers and contact information, please visit:
http://www.mscsoftware.com/Contents/Services/Technical-Support/Contact-Technical-Support.aspx
Support Center (www.simcompanion.mscsoftware.com)
Support Online. The Support Center provides technical articles, frequently asked questions and
documentation from a single location.
Main Index
Internet Resources
xii
Internet Resources
MSC.Software (www.mscsoftware.com)
MSC.Software corporate site with information on the latest events, products and services for the
CAD/CAE/CAM marketplace.
Main Index
MSC Nastran Fatigue Analysis Users Guide
Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Fatigue Analysis
1
Fundamentals of Fatigue Analysis
Overview
The Fatigue Analysis Five Box Trick
Life Prediction Methods
Finite Element Analysis Methods
Design Philosophies
Life Estimation Process
When to Use Which Method

Main Index
Overview
2
Overview
MSC Nastran embedded fatigue life estimation, when used early in a development design cycle has the
potenital to greatly enhance product life as well as reduce testing and prototype costs, thus ensuring
greater speed to market.
The purpose of this manual is to provide you with typical example problems to demonstrate proper usage
of the program. Each example is designed to show certain aspects and help to convey various principles
of fatigue life estimation. The intent is to get you up to speed as quickly as possible without a steep
learning curve or hours sifting through a thick manual.
Assumptions
This guide makes certain assumptions of the reader. The basic assumptions made are, a good knowledge
of basic computer skills and terminology, and a working knowledge of finite element analysis using MSC
Nastran. This manual does not deal with creation of finite element models or any aspects of actual finite
element analyses except where necessary to achieve proper fatigue life estimations.
This manual assumes that the user has little or no experience with fatigue analysis in general and
therefore makes every effort to explain principles of fatigue life estimation from example to example. It
is not meant to be an exhaustive course on fatigue analysis however. For this we refer you to the many
references sited in the Ap. C: References and Further Reading.
Organization of Guide
All chapters starting with Chapter 3, serve as tutorials to learn the basics of fatigue analysis using MSC
Nastran.
First read this chapter in its entirety and then familiarize yourself with the Nastran case control and bulk
data input in the next chapter, after which it is highly suggested that you start at the first example and
work your way sequentially. Each exercise introduces concepts that build on each other from exercise to
exercise.
Main Index
3
CHAPTER 1
What is Fatigue?
The first concept to understand before embarking on this tutorial is the definition of the term fatigue
within the confines of this guide. Very often the terms Fatigue, Fracture, and Durability are used
interchangeably. Each does, however, convey a specific meaning.
Although many definitions can be applied to the word, for the purposes of this manual, fatigue is failure
under a repeated or otherwise varying load which never reaches a level sufficient to cause failure in a
single application.
It can also be thought of as the initiation and growth of a crack, or growth from a pre-existing defect,
until it reaches a critical size, such as separation into two or more parts.
Fatigue analysis itself usually refers to one of two methodologies: either the Stress-Life (S-N) or S-N
method, commonly referred to as Total Life since it makes no distinction between initiating or growing
a crack, or the Local Strain or Strain-Life (e-N) method, commonly referred to as the Crack Initiation
method which concerns itself only with the initiation of a crack.
Fracture specifically concerns itself with the growth or propagation of a crack once it has initiated. MSC
Nastran fatigue analysis concerns itself only with the prior two types of fatigue analysis and is not
applicable for crack growth or propagation. For this capability you are referred to MSC Nastrans
cohesive zone modeling and/or virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) or MSC Fatigue, which uses a
LEFM method for crack growth prediction.
Durability is then the conglomeration of all aspects that affect the life of a product and usually involves
much more than just fatigue and fracture, but also loading conditions, environmental concerns, material
characterizations, and testing simulations, to name a few. A true product durability program in an
organization takes all of these aspects (and more) into consideration.
Note: Throughout this manual terms in blue italics mean there is a definition provided in the
Glossary of Terms (App. B).
Note: Fatigue cracks initiate and grow as a result of cyclic plastic deformation. Without plasticity
there can be no fatigue failure. All attempts are made in this guide to explain how plasticity
is taken into account when determining fatigue life from linear elastic finite element analysis.
Main Index
4
These fatigue analysis example exercises are constructed around the concept of the fatigue five-box
trick. The illustration below depicts this well. For any life analysis whether it be fatigue or fracture there
are always three inputs. The first three boxes are the inputs; box four the analysis; and box five the results.
1. Cyclic Material Information: Materials behave differently when they are subject to cyclic as
opposed to monotonic loading. Monotonic Properties are the result of material tests where the
load is steadily increased until the test coupon breaks. Cyclic Properties are obtained from
material tests where the loading is reversed and cycled until failure at various load levels. These
parameters differ depending on the fatigue analysis type involved.
2. Service Loading Information: The proper specification of the variation of the loading is
extremely important to achieve an accurate fatigue life prediction. The loading can be defined in
various manners. Whether it be time based, frequency based, or in the form of some sort of spectra
depends on the fatigue analysis type to be used. When working with finite element models the
loading can be force, pressure, temperature, displacement, or a number of other types. Loading in
the test world usually refers to the acquisition of a response measurement, usually from a strain
gauge.
3. Geometry Information: Geometry has different meanings depending on whether you are
working from a finite element model or from a test specimen. In the testing world, the geometry
input is the K
t
(stress concentration factor) since the point of failure is usually away from the
actual point of measurement. Therefore a geometry Stress Concentration Factor, Kt, is defined
to relate the measured response to that at the failure location. You can think of this as a fudge
factor. The corresponding role of finite elements is to produce fields of K
t
over the entire model,
with the additional complication that these local stress concentration factors are in the form of
stress tensors.
4. Analysis: The correctness and accuracy of each of the above inputs is important in that any error
in any of these will be magnified through the fatigue analysis procedure, the fourth box, since this
process is logarithmic. A ten percent error in loading magnitude could result in a 100% error in
the predicted fatigue life. In a conventional finite element based fatigue analysis, the 4th box often
contains both the stress prediction and fatigue life calculation.
Main Index
5
CHAPTER 1
5. Results: The fifth box is the postprocessing or results evaluation. This can take on the form of
color contours on a finite element model or a tabular listing but also quite often leads back into
the three inputs to see what effect variations of these inputs will have on the life prediction. This
is referred to as a sensitivity or a what if study. This is extremely useful at times when you are
not quite sure about the accuracy of one of the inputs. This then leads to design optimization using
fatigue life as a design constraint or possibly even as a design objective.
Main Index
6
There are three main life prediction methods as already mentioned earlier. These are Total Life, Crack
Initiation, and Crack Growth (Propagation). Total life is aptly named in that only the total life of the
component is of concern and not when a crack will initiate or how quickly it will grow.
The three methods are related to each other by the fact that the total number of cycles to failure, N
f
, equals
the number of cycles to initiate a crack, N
i
, plus the number of cycles to propagate that crack, N
p
. The
three methods have grown out of different needs over the decades using different techniques and having
different degrees of accuracy. So in theory this equation is true, but in practice when applying the three
methods to the same problem, rarely, if ever does it add up.
In reality however, rarely are all three methods used on the same problem, mainly because different
industries adopt different analysis methods depending on the driving design philosophy. See Design
Philosophies, 8.
Main Index
7
CHAPTER 1
Finite Element Analysis Methods
In order to do life predictions, MSC Nastran embedded fatigue analysis supports use of stress-life and
strain-life methods using the stress/strain response results from different finite element (FE) analysis
techniques. The table below summarizes which FE analysis types are applicable to which life prediction
methods in this release of the software.
Table 1-1 Life Prediction Methods vs. FE Analysis Results
Total Life (S-N) Crack Initiation (c-N)
Linear Static
SOL 101
Supported Supported
Normal Modes
SOL 103
Supported Supported
Modal Transient Response
SOL 112
Supported Supported
Design Optimization
SOL 200
ANALYSIS=STATICS only ANALYSIS=STATICS only
Main Index
Design Philosophies
8
Design Philosophies
There are three main fatigue design philosophies. Each centers around one of the fatigue life estimation
methodologies. To illustrate the three consider the design of a stool.
Safe Life
The Safe Life philosophy is a philosophy adopted by many, but especially the ground vehicle industry.
Products are designed to survive a specific design life. Full scale tests are usually carried out with
margins of safety applied. In general, this philosophy results in fairly optimized structures such as a stool
with three legs. Any less than three legs and it would fall over. This philosophy adopts the crack initiation
method and is used on parts and components that are relatively easy and inexpensive to replace and not
life threatening if failure were to occur. Most of the life is taken up in the initiation of a crack. The
propagation of that crack is very rapid and short in comparison.
Fail Safe
On the other end of the spectrum of design philosophies is that of Fail Safe. This is where a failure must
be avoided at all costs. And if the structure were to fail it must fall into a state such that it would survive
until repairs could be made. This is illustrated with our stool now having six legs. If one leg were to fail,
the stool would remain standing until repairs could be made. This philosophy is heavily used in safety
critical items such as in the aerospace or offshore industries.
Main Index
9
CHAPTER 1
Damage Tolerant
The middle ground philosophy is that of Damage Tolerant. This philosophy, adopted heavily in the
aerospace community and nuclear power generation, relies on the assumption that a flaw already exists
and that a periodic inspection schedule will be set up to ensure that the crack does not propagate to a
critical state between inspection periods. As implied, this philosophy adopts the crack growth method.
This is illustrated using our stool (now with four legs) and with someone inspecting it occasionally.
This particular design philosophy is generally used in conjunction with the fail safe philosophy, first to
design for no failure. and then to assume that, for whatever reason, a flaw exists and must be monitored.
MSC Nastrans cohesive zone and virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) modeling capabilities or
some other fracture mechanics technique such as MSC Fatigue (LEFM based) are best suited for this
damage tolerant design philosophy and are not covered topics of this manual. Fail safe and safe life
philosophies using the S-N and c-N methods are the topics covered by this manual.
Main Index
10
The life estimation process really centers around two major relationships.
1. The first relation is that of the loading environment to the stresses and strains in the component
or model. This load-strain or load-stress relation is determined using finite element modeling and
running linear elastic FE analysis. It is dependent on the characterization of the material properties
and in some instances requires that a Notch Correction procedure take place. For the purposes of
this discussion a notch correction is simply a way to compensate for plasticity from a linear FE
analysis.
2. The second relation is that of the stresses or stains to the life of the component or model. This is
accomplished by using damage modeling. Each fatigue life method has its own techniques to
determine and sum damage which shall be explained as you progress through the example
problems.
Main Index
11
CHAPTER 1
Of the three fatigue methods used to predict life, it is important to understand when to use which. This
will become more evident as you proceed through this manual and work each exercise. As a quick
answer to this question, the following guidelines are presented.
Stress-Life (S-N or Total Life)
Long life or High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) problems, where there is little Plasticity since the S-N
method is based on nominal stress
Components where crack initiation or crack growth modeling is not appropriate, e.g.,
composites, welds, plastics, and other non-ferrous materials
Situations where large amounts of pre-existing S-N data exist
Components which are required by a control body to be designed for fatigue using standard data
such as MIL handbook data.
Spot weld analysis and random vibration induced fatigue problems
Strain-Life (Crack Initiation or Local Strain or c-N)
Mostly defect free, metallic structures or components
Components where crack initiation is the important Failure Criterion - safety critical
components
Locating the point(s) where cracks may initiate, and hence the growth of a crack should be
considered
Evaluating the effect of alternative materials and different surface conditions
Components which are made from metallic, isotropic ductile materials which have symmetric
cyclic stress-strain behavior
Components that experience short lives - Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) - where plasticity is
dominant
Crack Growth (Damage Tolerant Design)
Pre-cracked structures or structures which must be presumed to be already cracked when
manufactured such as welds
Prediction of test programs to avoid testing components where cracks will not grow
Planning inspection programs to ensure checks are carried out with the correct frequency
To simply determine the amount of life left after crack initiation
Components which are made from metallic, isotropic ductile materials which have symmetric
cyclic stress-strain behavior
Main Index
12
Main Index
Chapter 2: Introduction to User Interface
2
Introduction to User Interface
Overview
FATIGUE Case Control
Fatigue Element Definitions
Fatigue Parameters
Fatigue Loading
Analysis Model Units
Fatigue Optimization
Main Index
Overview
14
Overview
Fatigue analysis using MSC Nastran consists of a FATIGUE case control output request and various bulk
data to define cyclic material properties, loading definitions and various other parameters, each of which
is described in this Chapter. A brief description of each entry is given below. Details of each entry are
given in subsequent sections of this Chapter.
Case Control
Bulk Data
The relationship between each entry and other material and/or element property entries is illustrated
below for various cases.
FATIGUE Request a fatigue analysis and resultant life and damage output.
See FATIGUE Case Control, 16.
DRESP1 Define fatigue responses in optimization (SOL200) runs. See
Fatigue Optimization, 46.
DTI, UNITS Specify the model analysis stress units. See Analysis Model
Units, 44.
FTGDEF Define areas (elements) of the model on which to perform
fatigue analysis. See Fatigue Element Definitions, 19.
FTGPARM Define various fatigue parameters such as the type of fatigue
analysis. See Fatigue Parameters, 30.
FTGEVNT Define loading events consisting of one or more simultaneously
occurring cyclic loading definition. Fatigue Loading, 35.
FTGLOAD Associate loading from a particular subcase or mode to its time
(cyclic) variation. Fatigue Loading, 35.
FTGSEQ Define a sequence of load events, sometimes referred to as a
duty cycle. Fatigue Loading, 35.
MATFTG Define cyclic material properties in the form of S-N or c-N data.
See Fatigue Element Definitions, 19.
PFTG Define various physical fatigue properties to the elements of
interest. See Fatigue Element Definitions, 19.
TABLFTG Define the cyclic variation of a particular load. Fatigue Loading,
35.
UDNAME Alternate method to associate the cyclic variation of a particular
load to an external file. Fatigue Loading, 35.
Main Index
15
CHAPTER 2
Relationship Between Inputs
Case Control (defines fatigue life output request):
FATIGUE[([PRINT,PLOT],[FORMAT=CODE],[BULK/SET]) ] = n
Bulk Data:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGPARM ID TYPE FACTOR NTHRD LOGLVL
"STRESS"
or
STRAIN
COMB CORR PLAST LOC INTERP
"RAINFLOW" RTYPE GATE PCTRED
"CERTNTY" SURV
"FOS" OPTION LIFE BACKACC MAXFAC
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGDEF ID TOPSTR PFTGID
"ELSET" ELSID1 PFTGID1 ELSID2 PFTGID2 ELSID3 PFTGID3
ELSID4 PFTGID4 ... ... ... ...
"XELSET" XELSID1 XELSID2 XELSID3 XELSID4 XELSID5 XELSID6 -etc-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGSEQ ID EVNTOUT METHOD
FID1 N1 FID2 N2 FID3 N3 -etc-
"UNITS" EQUIV EQNAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGEVNT ID FLOAD1 FLOAD2 FLOAD3 FLOAD4 FLOAD5 FLOAD6 -etc-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGLOAD ID TID LCID LDM SCALE OFFSET TYPE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
MATFTG MID CNVRT
"STATIC" YS UTS CODE TYPE RR SE
SN SRI1 b1 Nc1 b2 Nfc
M1 M2 M3 M4
"TABLE" VALUE1 TID1 VALUE2 TID2 VALUE3 TID3
VALUE4 TID4 ... ... -etc.-
"BASTEN" A B c Eb Sd
"EN" Sf b c Ef n K Nc
SEe SEp SEc Ne FSN S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PFTG ID LAYER FINISH KFINISH KF SCALE OFFSET
SHAPE KTREAT
What to Calculate
Where to Calculate
Cyclic Loading
}
Materials
Properties
Points to SET1, SET3, SET4
entries to define elements
Points to SUBCASE for
stress/strain extraction
Points to TABLFTG or
TABLED1 or UDNAME to
define cyclic loading
Associated to PSHELL,
PSOLID, or PSHEAR and
corresponding MAT1 entries.
Points to TABLEM1 for
defining discrete S-N or e-N
curves.
Main Index
16
All fatigue analyses must be initiated with a FATIGUE case control output request as described below.
Requests one or more fatigue analyses for use in pseudo-static (SOL 101), modal (SOL 103) and modal
transient (SOL 112) runs.
Format:
Examples:
Three examples are shown here. The first and second are identical and use the default BULK option
where bulk data entries FTGDEF, FTGPARM, and FTGSEQ of ID 100 are called out for the fatigue
analysis. The third example shows the SET option where case control SET ID 99 is called out. The case
control SET of ID 99 contains two IDs, 100 and 200. Thus two fatigue analyses are called out where bulk
data entries FTGDEF, FTGPARM, and FTGSEQ of IDs 100 and 200 are called out.
FATIGUE=100
FATIGUE(BULK)=100
SET 99 = 100, 200
FATIGUE(SET)=99
Remarks:
1. Both PRINT and PUNCH may be requested.
FATIGUE
Fatigue Output Request
Describer Meaning
PRINT The printer will be the output medium (default).
PUNCH The punch file will be the output medium.
PLOT Results will be generated but no printer output.
FORMAT Request that fatigue be output in specific file formats.
CODE Codes for specific file format output. See Remark 7.
BULK Specifies that the n refers directly to bulk data IDs of FTGSEQ/ FTGLOAD,
FTGPARM and FTGDEF entries of the same ID (default).
SET Specifies that the n refers to a previously appearing SET ID.
n ID of a SET case control entry (SET option) or ID of FTGSEQ/FTGLOAD,
FTGPARM, FTGDEF bulk data entries of the same ID (BULK option).
FATIGUE[ ([PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT], FORMAT=[CODE], [BULK/SET ] )] =n
Main Index
17
CHAPTER 2
2. A single FATIGUE case control is required to perform one or more fatigue analyses and must be
present above the SUBCASE level. If not present, no fatigue analysis will occur regardless of the
presence of other bulk data related to fatigue analysis.
3. A STRESS and/or STRAIN case control output request is also required in order for the FATIGUE
output request to obtain the necessary stresses or strains for the fatigue calculation.
4. For a single fatigue analysis, BULK=n points to a FTGDEF, a FTGPARM, and a FTGSEQ (or
FTGLOAD) entry, each with ID=n.
5. For multiple fatigue analyses, SET=n points to a previously appearing SET case control and each
member of the SET is the ID of a FTGDEF, a FTGPARM, and a FTGSEQ (or FTGLOAD) bulk
data entry with that ID.
6. A fatigue analysis must have, at a minimum, loading and material data defined on either FTGSEQ
or FTGLOAD and MATFTG bulk data entries, respectively, for a fatigue analysis to be valid.
FTGPARM and FTGDEF entries can be absent, in which case, defaults will be used.
7. The following additional, optional, fatigue output file formats may be requested. The given codes
must be summed if multiple files are requested. Example: CSV file and FEF file CODE would be
64+128=192
8. Standard fatigue output is:
File Format CODE
No additional output 0
FER (Design Life Output File) 4
UNV (Universal File) 32
CSV File (Comma Separated - Excel File) 64
FEF (Patran Results File) 128
Stress-Life (SN) Analysis Strain-Life (eN) Analysis
LIFE (Repeats) LIFE (Repeats)
LOG of LIFE (Repeats) LOG of LIFE (Repeats)
LIFE (user units*) LIFE (user units)
LOG of LIFE (user units) LOG of LIFE (user units)
DAMAGE DAMAGE
LOG of DAMAGE LOG of DAMAGE
MAX STRESS MAX STRESS or STRAIN
MIN STRESS MIN STRESS or STRAIN
Main Index
18
* User units are fatigue equivalent units as defined on the FTGSEQ or FTGLOAD en-
try and other output is available depending on the settings of the FTGPARM entry.
Dependent on STRESS or STRAIN flag set on FTGPARM entry.
Main Index
19
CHAPTER 2
To perform fatigue analysis, locations on the model (elements) and specific material and physical
properties must be specified. This is done with three main bulk data entries described here. The
MATFTG entry is required and for each MATFTG entry there must be a corresponding MAT1 entry of
the same ID, otherwise an error will occur as no cyclic material definitions would be available for the
fatigue analysis. The other two are the FTGDEF and PFTG entries used to limit the number of entities
and define physical fatigue properties, respectively. If there are no FTGDEF and PFTG entries, then
every element in the model associated to a MAT1 / MATFTG entry will be used with default properties.
Defines elements and their associated fatigue properties to be considered for fatigue analysis.
Format:
Examples:
Two examples are shown here. The first simply defines all elements of the model (that have fatigue
material properties) to use the physical fatigue properties defined by PFTG ID 3. The second example
defines actual element sets where IDs 14 and 15 refer to either SET1, SET3, or SET4 entries that define
a set of elements and each of these is assigned different physical fatigue properties defined by PFTG IDs
3 and 4.
FTGDEF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGDEF ID TOPSTR PFTGID
"ELSET" ELSID1 PFTGID1 ELSID2 PFTGID2 ELSID3 PFTGID3
ELSID4 PFTGID4 ... ... ... ...
"XELSET"
XELSID1 XELSID2 XELSID3 XELSID4 XELSID5 XELSID6 XELSID7
XELSID8 ... ... ... ... ... ...
FTGDEF 22 100.0 3
FTGDEF 22
ELSET 14 3 15 4
Field Contents
ID Unique identification number. (Integer > 0).
TOPSTR Top stress percentage. Only elements with combined stress in this top percentage
will be retained and report results. (0.0 < Real s 100.0; Default = blank - 100% will
be used). Should not be used with SOL 200 and should be left blank.
Main Index
20
Remarks:
1. FTGDEF bulk data entries are ignored if not selected by a FATIGUE case control. If no FTGDEF
is present for a given fatigue analysis, all elements of the model that have fatigue material
properties defined will be used with default properties.
2. If no PFTGID or PTFGIDi is specified, default properties will be assigned to the entities.
3. If a SET3 is specified, field 3 of the SET3 entry must be set to "ELEM". The SET4 entry must be
specified to select elements by property ID. Currently only elements that can be referenced by
PSHELL, PSHEAR, and PSOLID properties are supported - viz. CQUAD4, CQUADR,
CQUAD8, CSHEAR, CTRIA3,CTRIAR, CTRIA6, CHEXA, CPENTA, and CTETRA.
4. If only the XELSET flag is present, then the entire model is included in the fatigue analysis less
the excluded entities.
PFTGID ID of a PFTG entry for associating fatigue properties to all elements of the model.
Ignored if ELSET flag is present and should be left blank in this case. (Optional,
Integer > 0). See Remark 2.
ELSET Flag indicating that a list of element set and property pairs will follow, defining the
elements and their associated properties for consideration in the fatigue analysis.
(Optional, Character = ELSET)
ELSIDi ID of a SET1, SET3, or SET4 entry listing entities of the model (elements) to be
included in the fatigue analysis. (Integer > 0). See Remark 3.
PFTGIDi ID of a PFTG entry, which indicates the fatigue property associated to the preceding
entities defined by ELSIDi. (Optional, Integer > 0). See Remark 2.
XELSET Flag indicating that sets of elements to be excluded from the fatigue analysis will
follow. (Optional, Character). See Remark 4.
XELSIDi ID of a SET1 or SET3 entry listing elements of the model to be excluded from the
fatigue analysis. (Integer>0). See Remark 3. about SET3 specification.
Field Contents
Main Index
21
CHAPTER 2
Defines fatigue material properties.
Format:
Examples:
Two examples are shown here. The first defines only the STATIC line, which define an ultimate tensile
stress (UTS) and a material code (CODE). In this case, with no other lines of data, the cyclic material
properties for either an S-N or c-N analysis will be derived. The second example contains a line
specifically defining the parameters for an S-N curve. The STATIC line is required in either case as
UTS must be defined.
MATFTG
Fatigue Material Properties
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
MATFTG MID CNVRT
"STATIC" YS UTS CODE TYPE RR SE
SN SRI1 b1 Nc1 b2 Nfc
M1 M2 M3 M4
"TABLE" VALUE1 TID1 VALUE2 TID2 VALUE3 TID3
VALUE4 TID4 ... ... -etc.-
"BASTEN" A B c Eb Sd
"EN" Sf b c Ef n K Nc
SEe SEp SEc Ne FSN S
MATFTG 9
STATIC 430 682 99
MATFTG 9
STATIC 430 682 0.1
SN 3095 -0.1339 1.e8 0.0 1.e8
Field Contents
MID Unique material ID that matches the identification of a MAT1 entry
(Integer>0). See Remark 1.
CNVRT Conversion factor. See Remark 2. regarding units.
STATIC Required flag indicating that yield and/or ultimate tensile strengths and other
common parameters are supplied (Character=STATIC). See Remark 3. and
4.
Main Index
22
YS Yield strength (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 50.0 s Real s 3000). See
Remark 2. regarding units.
UTS Ultimate tensile strength (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 100.0 s Real s
4000). See Remark 2. regarding units.
CODE Material code used in automatically generating S-N or c-N data curves and
for surface finish corrections. See Remark 3.
TYPE Specification of the type of S-N curves defined using the TABLE or
BASTEN flag (no Default). See Remark 4.
RR R-ratio of test. (-1.0e30 s Real s 1.0, Default=-1.0).
SE Standard Error of Log(N). (0.0 s Real s 10.0, Default=0.1).
SN Flag indicating the definition of an S-N curve follows (Character=SN,
optional). See Remark 5..
SRI1 Stress range intercept. (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 1.0 s Real s 2.5e4,
no Default). See Remark 2 regarding units.
b1 First fatigue strength exponent. (-1.0 < Real< -0.02, no Default)
Nc1 In 1-segment S-N curve, the cycles limit of endurance. In 2-segment S-N
curve, this is the fatigue transition point. Both are defined in cycles. (1.0 s
Real s 1.0E25; no Default).
b2 Second fatigue strength exponent. It is zero when defining 1-segment S-N
curve; (-0.5 < Real s 0.0, Default=0.0).
Nfc Fatigue cutoff. (1.e-9 s Real s 0.0; Default=1.0e30).
M1 - M4 Mean stress slope parameters M1 through M4 representing sensitivity to
mean stress in four (4) regimes of R-ratio as plotted on a constant life Haigh
diagram and used in FKM mean stress correction. (-0.99 s Real s 0.0;
Default = blank). See Remark 6.
TABLE Flag indicating the definition of S-N curves as a number of tables follows
(Character=TABLE; optional). See Remark 5.
VALUEi The constant mean stress, R-ratio, or life (in cycles) of this particular S-N
curve. (Real; no Default). See Remark 2 regarding units.
TIDi A TABLEM1 ID defining the S-N curve of stress range (y) vs. life (x) in
cycles for this particular S-N curve, or mean stress (x) vs. stress amplitude
(y) for constant life (Haigh diagram) curves (Integer>0). See Remark 2.
regarding units.
BASTEN Flag indicating the definition of an S-N curve based on the Bastenaire S-N
approach (Character-BASTEN; optional). See Remark 5.
A Bastenaire coefficient - a parameter positioning the curve along the life axis.
(Valid range equivalent in MPa: 1.0e4 s Real s 1.0e10). See Remark 2.
regarding units.
Field Contents
Main Index
23
CHAPTER 2
Remarks:
1. The material ID must match that called out by the property entry. Element properties must
reference MAT1 entries in order to also reference MATFTG entries as only metal fatigue analysis
of isotropic materials is supported.
2. The CNVRT field is only used if fatigue material stress based parameters are directly input using
the "STATIC," "SN," "EN," "TABLE," or "BASTEN" methods. It is used to allow the user to
input the fatigue material stress related parameters, (YS, UTS, SRI1, VALUEi, TIDi, A, B, Eb,
K) in different units other than the model's consistent units. Example: model is producing
stresses in PSI units, fatigue material parameters input in MPa, the CNVRT factor should be
B Scale Factor parameter. (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 1.0 s Real s
1.0e10). See Remark 2. regarding units.
c Bastenaire exponent. (0.01 s Real s 1.1e10)
Eb Bastenaire fatigue limit (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 1.0 s Real s
1.0e10). See Remark 2 regarding units.
Sd Bastenaire scatter factor. (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 0.0 s Real s
1.0e25). See Remark 2 regarding units.
EN Flag indicating the definition of an c-N curve is to follow. (Character=EN;
optional). See Remark 5..
Sf Fatigue strength coefficient (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 50.0 s Real s
4000.0; no Default). See Remark 2. regarding units.
b Fatigue strength exponent (-0.5 s Real s -2.0e-3; no Default).
c Fatigue ductility exponent. (-1.2 s Real s -0.15; no Default).
Ef Fatigue ductility coefficient, (0.001s Real s 10.0; no Default).
n Cyclic strain-hardening exponent, (5.0e-3 s Real s 0.5; no Default).
K Cyclic strength coefficient, (Valid range equivalent in MPa: 50 s Real s
1.2e4; no Default). See Remark 5. regarding units.
Nc Cut-off (reversals), (1.0e5 s Real s 1.0e25; Default=2.0e8).
SEe Standard Error of Log(e) (elastic), (0.0 s Real s 10.0; Default=0.0).
SEp Standard Error of Log(e) (plastic), (0.0 s Real s 10.0; Default=0.0).
SEc Standard Error of Log(e) (cyclic), (0.0 s Real s 10.0; Default=0.0).
Ne Endurance Limit (Reversals), (1.0e-9 s Real s 1.0e25; Default=2.0e8).
FSN Fatemi-Socie Parameter, (0.0 s Real s 10; Default=0.6)
S Wang Brown Parameter, (-10.0 s Real s 10; Default=1.0)
Field Contents
Main Index
24
145.0377 to convert MPa to PSI. Note that the y-values of any referenced TABLEM1 entries are
also converted for the S-N method or both the x- and y-values when TYPE=LIFE (Haigh curves).
It is also necessary to use the DTI,UNITS for defining the model's stress units. See DTI,UNITS.
(Real; Default=1.0)
3. If only STATIC is supplied, then the S-N or c-N curve is derived using the UTS and a material
CODE. Valid codes are listed in the table below. At a minimum UTS must be supplied along with
the material CODE and E on MAT1, or an error will be issued. If either flag SN or EN flag is
present, then the automatic generation is suppressed and all the data necessary to define S-N or c-
N curves are required. The determination as to whether S-N or c-N curves are generated is
determined by the TYPE field set on the FTGPARM entry. If surface finish corrections are to be
applied, CODE is also required (see PFTG entry). When curves are derived, the specified CODE
gets internally converted to generic code ferrous=99 for CODE<100, aluminium=100 for 100 s
CODE < 200, other=0 for 200 s CODE < 300, or titatnium=300 for 300 s CODE < 400. When
SN or EN flags exist, the generic code is set to other, but the CODE is used as given.
4. TYPE can be set to AMPL, RANGE, or MAX for amplitude, range, or maximum stress,
respectively, when using the BASTEN flag. Or TYPE can be set to MEAN (or AMEAN),
RRATIO (or ARRATIO), or LIFE (or ALIFE) for constant mean, R-ratio, or life (Haigh
diagrams), respectively, when using the TABLE flag. When using multiple S-N curves for
mean stress correction, CORR=INTERP on FTGPARM must be used. In this case, for RRATIO,
a curve at R=-1 is required and for MEAN, a curve at zero (0) mean is required. AMPL, RANGE,
and MAX are used to define stress types of Bastenaire models. MEAN vs. AMEAN, or RRATIO
vs. ARRATIO, or LIFE vs. ALIFE indicates the stress type of the curves is range or amplitude,
respectively.
5. If an S-N analysis is specified (TYPE field on FTGPARM entry) but no S-N curve is supplied, an
error will be issued. If an c-N analysis is specified but no c-N curve is supplied, an error will be
issued. The STATIC data is required if SN or EN flags are specified on the MATFTG entry. SN,
BASTEN, and TABLE flags are mutually exclusive. Only one may appear at a time, otherwise an
error will be issued. EN flag may be present with SN, BASTEN, or TABLE flags, but one or the
other will be ignored based on the type of analysis as set using the TYPE field on the FTGPARM
entry.
6. Mean stress sensitity: M1 for R > 1; M2 for - < R < 0; M3 for 0 < R < 0.5; M4 for 0.5 < R < 1.
If M
1-4
are undefined, and the material type (CODE) is given , all the parameters will be estimated
using emprically defined rules for the FKM mean stress correction method. If only M
2
is defined,
then M
1
and M
4
will be set to zero and M
3
to M
2
/3
Table 2-1 Table of Material CODEs
CODE Description
1 Flake cast iron (FCI)
2 Ferritic cast iron with compacted graphite (FCICG)
3 Pearlitic cast iron with compacted graphite (PCICG)
4 Bainitic cast iron with compacted graphite (BCICG)
Main Index
25
CHAPTER 2
5 Ferritic cast iron with spheroidal graphite (FCISG)
6 Ferrite/pearlite cast iron with spheroidal graphite (FPCISG)
7 Pearlitic cast iron with spheroidal graphite (PCISG)
8 Bainitic cast iron with spheroidal graphite (BCISG)
9 Cast steel with less than 0.2% carbon (CSL2C)
10 Normalized cast steel with 0.2-0.4% carbon (NCS24C)
11 Quenched & tempered cast steel with 0.2-0.4% carbon (QTCS24)
12 Normalized cast steel with 0.4-0.7% carbon (NCS47)
13 Plain carbon wrought steel with < 0.2% carbon (PCWS)
14 Hot rolled/normalized plain carbon wrought steel, 0.2-0.4% carbon (HNPCWS24)
15 Quenched & tempered cast steel with 0.4-0.7% carbon (QTCS47)
16 Quenched & tempered plain carbon wrought steel, 0.2-0.4% carbon (QTPCWS24)
17 Hot rolled/normalized plain carbon wrought steel, 0.4-0.7% carbon (HNPCWS47)
18 Quenched & tempered plain carbon wrought steel, 0.4-0.7% carbon (QTPCWS47)
19 Normalized low alloy wrought steel (NLAWS)
20 Quenched & tempered low alloy wrought steel (QTHSLAWS)
21 Normalized Ni/Cr/Mo wrought steel (NNCMWS)
22 Quenched & tempered Ni/Cr/Mo wrought steel (QTNCMWS)
23 Austenitic stainless steel (ASS)
24 Ferritic stainless steel (FSS)
25 Martensitic stainless steel (MSS)
26 Annealed plain carbon wrought steel, 0.2-0.4% carbon (APCWS24)
27 Annealed plain carbon wrought steel, 0.4-0.7% carbon (APCWS47)
28 Normalized carbon/manganese steel (MCMS)
29 Quenched and tempered carbon/manganese steel (QTCMS)
30 Hardened chromium steel (HCS)
31 Quenched and tempered chromium steel (QTCS)
99 Steel of unknown heat treatment (STEEL)
100 Wrought aluminium (WA)
101 Wrought aluminium-copper alloy (WACA)
102 Wrought aluminium-manganese alloy (WAMNA)
103 Wrought aluminium-magnesium alloy (WAMGA)
CODE Description
Main Index
26
104 Wrought aluminium-magnesium-silicon alloy (WAMGSA)
105 Wrought aluminium-zinc alloy (WAZA)
106 Cast aluminium alloy (CAA)
107 Wrought complex special purpose aluminum alloys (WCSPAA)
200 Wrought copper (WCU)
201 Wrought brass (WBR)
202 Wrought aluminium bronze (WABR)
203 Cupronickel (CUPNI)
204 Nickel silver (NIAG)
205 Wrought phosphor bronze (WPHBR)
206 Wrought copper beryllium (WCUBE)
207 Cast copper alloys (CCUA)
300 Titanium alloy (TA)
400 Wrought magnesium alloys (WMGA)
401 Cast magnesium alloys (CMGA)
500 Fusible alloys, solders (FUSSOL)
600 Cast zinc alloys (CZINCA)
700 Wrought nickel alloys (WNIA)
701 Cast nickel alloys (CNIA)
800 Precious metals (PRECMET)
900 Clad materials (CLADMAT)
1000 Thermoplastics (THERPLAS)
1001 Thermosetting plastics (TSETPLAS)
CODE Description
Main Index
27
CHAPTER 2
Defines fatigue properties.
Format:
Examples:
This example shows that PFTG ID defines the elements associated with it (called out by the FTGDEF
entry) to have a polished surface finish and for the associated stresses to be scaled by a factor of 1.2.
Remarks:
1. For shell elements, it is necessary to specify the top or bottom or the worst (larger damage
between top and bottom at the same location).
PFTG
Fatigue Properties
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PFTG ID LAYER FINISH KFINISH KF SCALE OFFSET
SHAPE KTREAT
PTFG 3.0 POLISH 1.2
Field Contents
ID Unique ID referenced by a FTGDEF bulk data entry. (Integer>0)
LAYER Region layer for shell elements. Values can be 0=Worst, 1=Top (Z2), 2=Bottom
(Z1). (Integer; Default=0). See Remark 1.
FINISH Material Surface Finish. This is a result of manufacturing process. Value can be
NONE, POLISH, GROUND, MACHINE, POOR, ROLLED, CAST, KROUGH,
KSURFC (Character; Default=NONE). See Remark 2.
KFINISH Roughness factor for FINISH = KROUGH (0.0 < Real < 1.0, no Default).
Surface roughness in microns for FINISH = KSURFC (Real > 0.0; no Default; 0.0 s
Real s 1.0 for materials not listed in Remark 3.).
KF Fatigue strength reduction factor. (Real > 0.0, Default=1.0). See Remark 4.
SCALE Factor used to scale the resulting FE stresses of entities associated to this property set
(Real; Default=1.0).
OFFSET Offset used to offset the resulting FE stresses of entities associated to this property set
(Real; Default=0.0).
SHAPE Shape factor (Real > 1.0; no Default). See Remark 5.
KTREAT Treatment factor (Real > 0.0; Default = 1.0).
Main Index
28
2. The KF field can be used in lieu of or in addition to the FINISH & KTREAT field to modify the
fatigue limit by multiplying the original fatigue limit by this value. POOR = Poor Machined.
ROLLED = As Rolled. CAST = As Cast. KROUGH and KSURFC require that a KFINISH be
entered. A material CODE on the MATFTG entry must be supplied to use anything other than
NONE or POLISH, otherwise an error is issued.
3. If KFINISH = KSURFC, the user should enter a value for surface roughness R
z
in m. This is
the average surface roughness according to the German standard DIN 4768. The Surface
Roughness Factor K
r
will then be calculated based on the strength and type of material (for
example stronger materials are in general more sensitive to surface finish, and cast materials less
so). The method for calculating K
r
is taken from the FKM guideline Analytical Strength
Assessment of Components in Mechanical Engineering.
If R
z
<= 1m, K
r
= 1.
Otherwise:
K
r
= 1-a
r
log (R
z
) log(2R
m
/R
m,N,min
)
R
m
is the UTS in MPa
R
m,N,min
and a
r
are constants.
4. Fatigue strength reduction factor can take into account notch effects, size effects, and loading type
influence. where the latter three are correction factors for each effect,
respectively.
5. Setting the shape factor activates the Seeger Heuler plastic limit load correction. Leave this field
blank if no plastic limit load correction is required.
Table 2-2 Constants for Derivation of Surface Roughness Factor K
r
from Roughness R
z
Material Steel GS*
*GS = cast steel and heat treatable cast steel, for general purpose
GGG
GG = cast iron with lamellar graphite (grey cast iron)
GT
GGG = nodular cast iron
GG**
**GT = malleable cast iron
Wrough
t Al
Alloys
Cast Al
alloys
CODE from
MATFTG
13,15,16-
99
9-12,
15
5-8 2-4 1 100-105 106
a
r
0.22 0.20 0.16 0.12 0.06 0.22 0.20
R
m,N,min
400 400 400 350 100 133 133
K
f
C
notch
C
size
C
l oadi ng
=
Main Index
29
CHAPTER 2
Available
* Available for Multi-temperature curve
Not available for Multi-mean or Multi R-ratio curves
Table 2-3 Availability of Settings for Different Analysis Types
Fatigue
Property
Analysis / Material Type Category
SN EN
Dang
Van
Spot
Weld
Seam
Weld
Multiaxial
c-N
Adhesive
Bond Composite
Scale Factor
Offset
KTreatment
KUser
KRoughness
Weld
diameter

Default
temperature
* *
ShapeFactor
Adhesive
Thickness

Bond Line
Offset

Initial Crack
Size

Main Index
Fatigue Parameters
30
Fatigue Parameters
Fatigue parameters are defined with the entry described below. The main use of this entry is to specify
the type of fatigue analysis (S-N or c-N), but many other parameters may be set using this entry. Most of
these are explained in the tutorials that follow in subsequent chapters.
Defines parameters for a fatigue analysis.
Format:
Examples:
The first example defines an S-N analysis with all other parameters defaulted. The second example
specifies STRESSes to be passed to the fatigue analysis and to convert the stress tensor to a signed von
Mises (SGVON) scalar value and to perform no mean stress correction (NONE).
FTGPARM
Fatigue Parameters
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGPARM ID TYPE FACTOR NTHRD LOGLVL
"STRESS"
or
STRAIN
COMB CORR PLAST LOC INTERP
"RAINFLOW" RTYPE GATE PCTRED
"CERTNTY" SURV
"FOS" OPTION LIFE BACKACC MAXFAC
FTGPARM
22 SN
FTGPARM
22 SN
STRESS SGVON NONE
Field Contents
ID Unique ID of the FTGPARM entry (Integer > 0). See Remark 1.
TYPE Type of fatigue analysis: "SN" or "EN" (Character, Default=SN).
FACTOR Global scale factor to be applied to combined resultant stress output (Real > 0.0,
Default=1.0).
NTHRD Number of treads to use for parallel processing for this fatigue analysis Integer >
0; Default = 1). Zero (0) is used as a flag to tell the code to automatically determine
the number of threads to use.
Main Index
31
CHAPTER 2
LOGLVL Level of messaging sent to the log file (Integer > 0, Default = 0; 0=None, 1=Error,
2=Info, 3=Low, 4=Medium, 5=High). Note that LOGLVL > 3 can result in a
significant performance penalty and should be used for debugging purposes only.
"STRESS" Flag indicating that stress is used in the fatigue calculation. See Remark 2.
STRAIN Flag indicating that strain is used in the fatigue calculation. Not valid for TYPE =
SN. See Remark 2.
COMB Stress/strain combination to use in the fatigue analysis. Acceptable values are
listed in Table 2-4 after the Remarks below (Character; Default=ABSMAXPR).
CORR Mean stress correction to use in the fatigue analysis. Acceptable values are listed
in Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 after the Remarks below (Character; Default=None).
PLAST Plasticity correction for TYPE = EN. Value can be "NEUBER," or "SEEGER" for
Neuber or Hoffmann-Seeger methods, respectively (Character;
Default=NEUBER). See Remark 3.
LOC Location to report fatigue lives. Values are "NODE" or "ELEMENT"
(Default=NODE). See Remark 4.
INTERP Interpolation limit for multi-curve mean stress correction method (Integer > 0;
0=Use Max Curve, 1=Extrapolate; Default = 0).
"RAINFLOW" Flag indicating that parameters that follow define rainflow cycle counting
parameters for rainflow data reduction. See Remark 5.
RTYPE Method of rainflow data reduction (Time History Compression). Value can be
"LOAD" for load time history data reduction on each load time history or
"FAST" for performing a less accurate, but computationally faster method
(Character; no default).
GATE Load value used as gate range. This load is used for gating out small disturbances
of "noise" in the time history using a peak-valley extraction method to speed up the
analysis. Only used if RTYPE=LOAD. GATE and PCTRED are mutually
exclusive. PCTRED ignored if GATE is supplied. (Rea l> 0.0, Default=0.0)
PCTRED Percent reduction value based on the maximum load range to used to reduce the
load time history using a peak-valley extraction method to speed up the analysis.
Only used if RTYPE=LOAD. Ignored if GATE is supplied. GATE and PCTRED
are mutually exclusive. (0.0 s Real s 100.0, Default = 50.0)
"CERTNTY" Flag indicating that the parameter that follows defines the certainty of survival in
fatigue analysis.
SURV Certainty of survival based on the scatter in the S-N or c-N curves. (0.1 s Real s
99.9; Default = 50.0). See Remark 6.
"FOS" Flag indicating that parameters that follow are used in a factor of safety analysis.
The presence of this flag triggers a factor of safety analysis. See Remark 7.
Field Contents
Main Index
Fatigue Parameters
32
Remarks:
1. FTGPARM bulk data will be ignored if not selected by a FATIGUE case control entry. If a
FTGPARM entry is not defined, default properties are used for the requested fatigue analysis.
2. For total life or stress-life (TYPE=SN), only STRESS results can be used. For crack initiation or
strain-life (TYPE=EN), the fatigue analyzer may use either STRESS or STRAIN results from the
finite element analysis. This selection should make no difference to the final results of a crack
initiation calculation, as strains will always be calculated. The exception is when shell results are
used. In this case, STRESS should be selected because only 2D results are available and the
absence of the out-of-plane strains will cause incorrect calculation of combined parameters. It is
an error to have both STRESS and STRAIN lines. If both are missing, then STRESS will be
assumed with its default values.
3. PLAST can be set to NEUBER or SEEGER. Please note that NEUBER can be used universally
for uniaxial stress states. SEEGER requires a 2D stress state and is generally used when the stress
state in not purely uniaxial. PLAST is only valid for TYPE=EN.
4. If LOC=ELEMENT is selected, fatigue lives are calculated based on stresses/strains at element
centroids (not recommended for anything but shell or 2D solid elements (plane stress/strain and
axisymmetric). If LOC=NODE is selected, the fatigue lives are calculated from the
stresses/strains at the element nodes.
5. This RAINFLOW flag is only necessary to use if it desired to speed up the analysis for purposes
of quick critical location identification or for sanity checks. RTYPE determines how to compress
the input time history data for the purposes of speeding up the calculation, possibly at the loss of
accuracy of the results. RTYPE=FAST simply reduces the load time histories to a single cycle
using only the minimum and maximum from the input time series data, without losing phase
information across multiple load cases. RTYPE=LOAD using PCTRED performs a multi-
channel peak-valley extraction on the time series data prior to processing with PCTRED value set
as a percentage of the range of the input data. RTYPE=LOAD using GATE performs a multi-
channel peak-valley extraction on the time series data prior to processing with GATE value
applied directly in the units of the time series data.
OPTION Supported option is LIFE, requesting a life-based factor of safety analysis
(Character; default=LIFE).
LIFE The targeted design life given in user defined life units (such as laps, miles, etc.)
as defined by UNITS line on FTGSEQ or FTGLOAD entry, or Repeats of the
cyclic loading if no UNITS line exists (Real > 0, no default).
MAXFAC The maximum safety factor to calculate. When this factor is exceeded, the analysis
will go on to the next element and report the maximum for the exceeded element
(20.0 s Real s 5.e6; no Default).
BACKACC The back calculation accuracy used to control back calculation iterations to
determine the scale factor on the applied stress level to achieve the target design
life. (0.01 < Real s100.0, Default = 1.0).
Field Contents
Main Index
33
CHAPTER 2
6. Certainty of survival is based on scatter in the S-N or c-N curves. It is used to modify the curves
according to the standard error parameters ( ) defined in the MATFTG material entry. A
higher reliability level requires a larger certainty of survival.
7. This FOS option will calculate a type of safety factor for over design analysis to be performed.
This analysis is in addition to the normal fatigue life/damage output and must be requested by the
presence of this FOS flag and its parameters. This analysis method can be very useful for those
components which predict infinite life, providing a measure of the risk of fatigue failure. The
results of this analysis are factors by which the stress would have to be scaled to attain the
specified design life. A value of one suggests that the specified life will be exactly attained
whereas a factor less than one means the desired life will not be attained. Factors greater than one
are, therefore, most desirable. By definition the resulting life values will be the target life, thus
only the scale factor and maximum/minimum stress results are of interest when FOS is defined.
Table 2-4 Allowable Values for the COMB Field *
* The six multiaxial components defined by the stress tensor (or strain tensor) are resolved into
one uniaxial or combined value for fatigue calculations for each node or element for each time
step. This is necessary since the fatigue damage models used are based on theories which deal
with uniaxial stress. These stress scalar combinations can be any of the above. For S-N anal-
ysis, the signed von Mises (SGVON) will be smaller than the Absolute Maximum Principal
(ABSMAXPR) when there is positive biaxiality and hence this selection would be less conser-
vative. (Note also that some BS weld classes require shear stress to be used.) The sign on the
signed parameters is taken from the sign of the absolute maximum principal value. It is neces-
sary to sign these stress parameters, otherwise non-conservative fatigue life estimates will re-
sult. It is therefore not recommended to use non-signed values (MAXPRINC, VONMIS,
MAXSHR), but the options are available.
Stress/Strain
Combination
Valid for
TYPE Meaning
ABSMAXPR SN, EN Absolute Maximum Principal (default)
MAXPRINC SN Maximum Principal Stress
SGVON SN, EN Signed von Mises Stress
VONMIS SN von Mises Stress
SGMAXSHR SN, EN Signed Maximum Shear
MAXSHR SN Maximum Shear
CRITICAL SN, EN Critical Plane Analysis - every 10 degrees - Not valid for 3D solid
elements
SE
n
Main Index
Fatigue Parameters
34
Table 2-5 Allowable Values for the CORR Field
Mean Stress
Correction
Valid for
TYPE Meaning
NONE SN, EN No mean stress correction (default)
GOODMAN SN Goodman mean stress correction
GERBER SN Gerber mean stress correction
GDMANT SN Tension only Goodman mean stress correction
GRBERT SN Tension only Gerber mean stress correction
FKM SN FKM mean stress correction method. Uses M1, M2, M3, M4 slopes as
defined in MATFTG entry. See remarks in MATFTG entry.
INTERP SN Interpolation method used with multiple SN curves only. TYPE field of
MATFTG entry must be set to MEAN, RRATIO, or LIFE. Requires that
there be multiple curves defined, one at R=-1 for TYPE=RRATIO, or one
at zero (0) mean stress for TYPE=MEAN.
SWT EN Smith-Watson-Topper mean stress correction
MORROW EN Morrow mean stress correction
Table 2-6 Allowable S-N vs. Mean Stress Correction Methods
Mean Stress
Correction
S-N Method
Standard
Multi Mean
Curve
Multi R-
Ratio Curve Haigh Bastenaire
NONE YES YES*
* Allowed but a curve at zero mean stress must be present.
YES
Allowed but a curve at R = -1 must be present.
NO YES
GOODMAN YES YES* YES NO YES
GERBER YES YES* YES NO YES
GDMANT YES YES* YES NO YES
GRBERT YES YES* YES NO YES
FKM YES YES* YES NO YES
INTERP NO YES YES YES NO
Main Index
35
CHAPTER 2
Fatigue Loading
Fatigue analysis must have a definition of the cyclic nature of the loading. This is accomplished using a
number of bulk data entries and can be as simple as a single load oscillating between one (1) and minus
one (-1) to a complicated duty cycle consisting of multiple load events each containing multiple,
simultaneously acting loads. These entries are described here and more specific examples given in each
of the examples in this manual to clarify the proper usage of these entries. For a valid fatigue analysis, a
FTGSEQ entry must be defined or at a minimum, a FTGLOAD entry must be defined, in the case of only
a single loading.
Defines the loading sequence for pseudo-static fatigue analysis using SOL 101 or modal transient fatigue
analysis using SOL 103 or SOL 112.
Format:
Example:
This example simply shows that the load sequence defined by FTGSEQ ID 1 is made up of a single
loading event defined by FTGEVNT entry of ID 6 (in the case of SOL 101 or 103) or SUBCASE 6 (in
the case of SOL 112) and that event is repeated or occurs 1.5 times.
FTGSEQ
Fatigue Load Sequence
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGSEQ ID EVNTOUT METHOD
FID1 N1 FID2 N2 FID3 N3 FID4 N4
FID5 N5 ... ... ... ... ... ...
-etc.-
FTGSEQ 1
6 1.5
Field Contents
ID Unique ID with respect to all other FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT entries. (Integer>0) See
Remark 1.
EVNTOUT Flag for requesting fatigue output for each event individually. (Integer; 0=no or 1=yes;
Default = 0). See Remark 7.
METHOD Event processing method. 0=independent, 1=Combined Full, 2= Combined Fast
(Integer; Default = 0). See Remark 2.
Main Index
Fatigue Loading
36
Remarks:
1. FTGSEQ bulk data are called out by FATIGUE case control.
2. Processing of events can be done by determining the damage due to each event independently
(default) and then summing the damage due to all events. Or the events can be concatenated and
damage determined after rainflow cycle counting over all events. The advantage of the
independent method over the combined methods is computational expense versus accuracy. The
combined method will close all cycles, whereas the individual method may miss a large damaging
cycle if the cycle begins in one event and ends or closes in a subsequent event. The combined fast
method performs a rainflow count data reduction to speed up the analysis and determine the most
critical locations first and then redoes a full analysis on the critical locations.
3. Once a FTGSEQ bulk data entry is referenced in an FIDi field, it can't be referenced again in any
other FTGSEQ entries (within its own associations - the same fatigue analysis) to avoid infinite
loops. And if it is referenced by the FATIGUE case control, it cannot appear in any FIDi field of
the FTGSEQ bulk data.
4. Different FTGEVNTs can be set up and the user can construct each sequence by specifying how
many times to repeat each event in a sequence. One sequence could then be referenced in another
sequence to tell the new sequence how many times to repeat that sequence. As an example,
assume there are three events an automobile is subjected to: cobble stones, pot holes, speed
bumps. One sequence might be five (5) "cobble stones," six (6) "potholes" and three (3) "speed
bumps." This sequence may be called "torture track." Also define two more events called
"cornering left" and "cornering right." A load sequence of ten (10) "cornering left" and ten (10)
"cornering right" might be called "country road." Now with a nested FTGSEQ you can put these
together any way you want. So one fatigue analysis might use a sequence of only "country road,"
another of only "torture track" and another of a combined six (6) "torture tracks," five (5) "country
roads," followed by one (1) more "torture track" and one (1) more "country road" This would
result in 3 fatigue analyses.
FIDi ID of a FTGEVNT or another FTGSEQ entry for pseudo-static fatigue analysis using
SOL 101 or a modal analysis using SOL 103, or a subcase ID that represents the loading
event or another FTGSEQ entry for modal transient fatigue analysis using SOL 112.
(Integer > 0). See Remark 3. and 4.
Ni Number of repeats of this loading sequence or event (Real>0.0, Default=1.0). For
METHOD=1 and 2, Ni must be a whole number, i.e., 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, etc. In other words,
fractions of events are not allowed. See Remark 3. and 4.
"UNITS" Flag indicating that a fatigue equivalent unit name is applied to this loading. See
Remark 5. and 6.
EQUIV Number of equivalent units. (Real>0.0; Default=1.0). See Remark 5. and 6.
EQNAME Equivalent name of this loading event. EQNAME can span across fields 4 through 9.
If not defined it will be called Repeats. (Character) See Remark 5. and 6. Spaces are not
allowed in the name.
Field Contents
Main Index
37
CHAPTER 2
5. If the "UNITS" flag is absent, the default fatigue equivalent unit is 1.0 Repeats of the resulting
stress time history sequence. Equivalent units specified on FTGLOAD entries are ignored when
FTGSEQ entries are used
6. Example of using equivalent units: If one repeat of the sequence is equivalent to 5 times around
a test track, the equivalent unit name, EQNAM, might be "laps," and the equivalent unit, EQUIV,
would be 5. Fatigue life will be reported in these units if defined, otherwise they are reported as
repeats of the loading sequence. Life output is reported in both Repeats and the fatigue equivalent
units, if defined.
7. For duty cycle jobs, temporary DAC files are created. Use EVNTOUT=1 if you wish to keep the
files, otherwise they are deleted after job terminates. For SOL 200 only EVNTOUT=0 is
supported.
Main Index
Fatigue Loading
38
Groups simultaneously applied loads into loading events for pseudo-static fatigue analysis using SOL
101 or modal analysis using SOL 103 by referencing FTGLOAD entries.
Format:
Example:
This example shows that this fatigue load event consists of two separate, but simultaneously applied,
loading defined by FTGLOAD entries of IDs 4 & 11.
Remarks:
1. Each FTGEVNT ID must be unique relative to all other FTGEVNT and FTGSEQ IDs
FTGEVNT
Fatigue Loading Events
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGEVNT ID FLOAD1 FLOAD2 FLOAD3 FLOAD4 FLOAD5 FLOAD6 FLOAD7
FLOAD8 ... ... ... ... ... ...
-etc-
FTGEVNT 22 4 11
Field Contents
ID Unique ID. See Remark 1.
FLOADi ID of a FTGLOAD entry (Integer > 0, no default).
Main Index
39
CHAPTER 2
Defines loading time variation for pseudo-static fatigue analysis using SOL 101 or modal analysis using
SOL 103.
Format:
Examples:
Two examples are shown here where the first associates SOL 101 subcase ID 2 to its cyclic variation
defined by TABLFTG ID 4. This could also be a SOL 103 mode number associated to its modal
participation factor (modal loading). The second shows the same thing except that now it is subcase ID
5 associated to UDNAME entry 4 (flagged by the DB). The UDNAME entry defines an external file
containing the cyclic variation of the loading.
FTGLOAD
Fatigue Loading Time Variation
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FTGLOAD ID TID LCID LDM SCALE OFFSET TYPE
FTGLOAD 55 4 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 23 4 5 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UNITS 5.5 Flights
Field Contents
ID Unique ID which is referenced by an FTGEVNT entry or directly by a FATIGUE case
control (Integer > 0). See Remark 1.
TID Table ID of a TABLFTG (or TABLED1) entry that defines the time variation of the
loading or the ID of a UDNAME entry for external definition of the loading time
variation (Integer > 0). See Remarks 2. through 5.
LCID Subcase ID of a linear static solution SUBCASE for SOL 101 or a mode number for
SOL 103 (Integer > 0, no default) .
LDM Largest magnitude of the applied load (in the same units used to define the load time
variation in field TID) used to normalize the load (Real, default=1.0). This effectively
scales the stress to simulate a stress state due to a unit load. See Remark 6.
SCALE Scale factor applied to the load time history (Real, default=1.0). See Remark 6.
OFFSET Offset applied to the load time history (Real, default=0.0). See Remark 6.
TYPE Flag indicating the type of load being defined. Values can be blank, "DB", or "STATIC".
Default is blank. See Remarks 2. through 5.
Main Index
Fatigue Loading
40
Remarks:
1. If referenced directly by a FATIGUE case control, there cannot be a FTGSEQ bulk data entry by
the same ID.
2. If the TYPE field is blank then TID references a TABLFTG or TABLED1 entry.
3. If TYPE=DB, then TID references a UDNAME ID. A UDNAME entry must be supplied in this
case to specify the file and path of the externally defined load time variation. This file is expected
to be in standard DAC format.
4. If TYPE is STATIC, the TID field should be left blank as it will be ignored. STATIC indicates
that the stress state from the specified LCID is to act as a static offset with no load time variation
when performing the linear superposition, which will give every element a different offset defined
by the stress state at each element of the specified subcase, as opposed to simply specifying the
OFFSET field, which gives every element the same offset. If the "STATIC" flag is specified, there
must be at least two FTGLOAD entries defined and called out by a FTGEVNT entry, one of
which must be time varying (see Remark 6.).
5. For modal analysis using SOL 103, the referenced load variation defines the modal participation
factors for the referenced mode.
6. The LDM, SCALE, and OFFSET are used together in the following manner to scale/modify the
stress state in order to determine the resulting stress time variation:
where is the resulting stress tensor at time t, is the stress tensor from the subcase or
mode defined by the LCID field, and P(t) is the y value of the load-time history at time t as defined
by the TID field. For multiple loads, the principle of linear superposition is used to combine all
loads for a single event.
7. If the "UNITS" flag is absent, the default fatigue equivalent unit is 1.0 Repeats of the stress time
history. If this FTGLOAD is referenced by a FTGEVNT, then the equivalent units on this entry
are ignored and those on the FTGSEQ entry take precedent. Only if a FTGLOAD is directly
referenced by a FATIGUE case control are the fatigue equivalent units used as defined on the
FTGLOAD entry.
"UNITS" Flag indicating that a fatigue equivalent unit name is defined for this loading. See
Remarks 7. and 8.
EQUIV Number of equivalent units (Real>0.0, default=1.0). See Remarks 7. and 8.
EQNAME Equivalent name of this loading history. EQNAME can span across fields 4 through 9.
If not defined it will be called Repeats (Character). See Remarks 7. and 8.
Field Contents
o
i j
t ( ) P t ( )
o
i j , l
LDM
------------- SCALE
\ .
| |
OFFSET + =
o
i j
t ( ) o
i j l ,
Main Index
41
CHAPTER 2
8. Example of using equivalent units: If one repeat of the defined time history is equivalent to 5
times around a test track, the equivalent unit name, EQNAM, might be "laps," and the equivalent
unit, EQUIV, would be 5.0. Fatigue life will be reported in these units if defined, otherwise they
are reported as Repeats of the loading. Life output is reported in both Repeats and the fatigue
equivalent units, if defined.
9. All FTGLOAD entries referenced by a FTGEVNT should reference different SUBCASEs for
SOL 101 (or modes for SOL 103) and must have time variations consisting of the same number
of points.
Main Index
Fatigue Loading
42
Defines tabular data for defining fatigue cyclic loading with respect to time (time history).
Format:
Example:
Remarks:
1. The TABLFTG is referenced by a FTGLOAD entry.
2. The x-values are assumed to be in ascending order. For rainflow cycle counting purposes the
actual x values are inconsequential.
3. For modal analysis using SOL 103, this would define the modal participation factors for a
particular mode.
TABLFTG
Fatigue Loading Tabular Data
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
TABLFTG TID
y1 y2 y3 y4 y5 y6 y7 "ENDT"
TABLFTG 1
0.000 -1.0 1.0 0.0 ENDT
Field Contents
TID Table identification number. (Integer > 0)
yi Y value of each point in the time history curve. (Real).
"ENDT" Flag indicating the end of the table.
Main Index
43
CHAPTER 2
Provides the name of a file that can be referenced from other bulk data entries such as FTGLOAD.
Format:
Example:
Remarks:
1. The UDID is referenced by a FTGLOAD entry.
2. The NAME can be of any length, but the Nastran Fatigue capability only supports up to 64 words
which corresponds to four lines of data in fields 2 through 9.
3. If only a NAME with no path (e.g., sine01.dac) is supplied, the file is assumed to be located in
the same directory as the Nastran input file. If an absolute or relative path is supplied (e.g,
/local/user/fatigue/sine01.dac), it will be used.
UDNAME
User Defined File Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
UDNAME UDID
NAME
Field Contents
UDID Unique UDID (Integer>0). See Remark 1.
NAME Name of a file (with or without path) such as the external loading time history in DAC format
(Character).
Main Index
44
When performing fatigue analysis, it is important to understand the relationship between the
models units and those necessary for a fatigue analysis. Please see Remark 2 in the description
of DTI, UNITS below.
Defines units necessary for conversion during the analysis for the Nastran/ADAMS interface or a Nastran
fatigue analysis.
Format:
Example:
For fatigue analysis, only the stress units are necessary.
Remarks:
1. The DTI,UNITS Bulk Data entry is required for a ADAMSMNF FLEXBODY=YES run. See the
ADAMSMNF*, 218 case control entry. ADAMS is not a unitless code (as is Nastran). Units must
be specified. A DTI Bulk Data entry provides UNITS (a unique identifier) input as the above
example illustrates. Once identified, the units will apply to all superelements in the model.
Acceptable character input strings are listed in the table below. MASS, FORCE, LENGTH, and
TIME are required for ADAMS interface.
2. Fatigue analysis as performed by MSC Nastran requires the identification of the stress units used
in the analysis. MSC Nastran is a unitless code and it is therefore up to the user to ensure
compatible units between all interactions. However, during the fatigue analysis, the stresses must
be converted to SI units of MPa. This is because the fatigue material property stress parameters
as defined on the MATFTG entry are internally converted to standard SI units of MPa and the
stresses from the analysis must match. Thus it is necessary for the user to use DTI,UNITS to
define the stress units to ensure proper conversion. If the model units system produces stresses in
MPa, then DTI,UNITS is not necessary or DTI,UNITS should be set to MPa (the default).
DTI,UNITS
Unit Definitions
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DTI UNITS 1 MASS FORCE LENGTH TIME STRESS
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
Main Index
45
CHAPTER 2
Mass Force Length Time Stress
KG - kilogram N - newton KM - kilometer H - hour MPA -
megapascal
LBM - pound-
mass
LBF - pounds-force M - meter MIN - minute PA - pascal
SLUG - slug KGF - kilograms-
force
CM - centimeter S - second PSI - pound per
square inch
GRAM - gram OZF - ounce-force MM - millimeter MS - millisecond KSI - kilo
pound per
square inch
OZM - ounce-
mass
DYNE - dyne MI - mile US - microsecond PSF - pound
per square foot
KLBM - kilo
pound-mass (1000
lbm)
KN - kilonewton FT - foot NANOSEC -
nanosecond
KSF - kilo
pound per
square foot
MGG - megagram KLBF - kilo pound-
force (1000 lbf)
IN- inch D - day DYNECM2 -
dyne per
square
centimeter
SLINCH - 12
slugs
MN - millinewton UM - micrometer BAR - bar
UG - microgram UN - micronewton NM - nanometer ATM - physical
atmosphere
NG - nanogram NN - nanonewton ANG - angstrom
USTON - US ton YD - yard
MIL - milli-inch
UIN - micro-inch
Main Index
46
Design optimization usinig SOL 200 allows for the definition of fatigue life or damage responses. These
responses can be used as design objectives, such as maximizing life or minimizing damage, or for
defining constraints on fatigue life or damage at particular locations on the model. Below is a partial
listing of the DRESP1 entry explaining how it is used for fatigue responses only. The fatigue item codes
are also listed.
Defines a set of structural responses that is used in the design either as constraints or as an objective.
Format:
Example:
This example defines a fatigue life response (ATTA=4) on element 321 (ATT1=321) defined by the
fatigue analysis called out by FATIGUE case control of ID 44 (ATTB=44). A label called FLIGHTS is
used to name the response.
DRESP1
Design Sensitivity Response Quantities
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DRESP1 ID LABEL RTYPE PTYPE REGION ATTA ATTB ATT1
ATT2 -etc.-
DRESP1 55 FLIGHTS FATIGUE ELEM 4 44 321
Field Contents
ID Unique entry identifier. (Integer > 0)
LABEL User-defined label. (Character)
RTYPE Response type. See Table 2-7. (Character)
PTYPE Element flag (PTYPE = ELEM) or property entry name. Used with element
type responses (stress, strain, force, etc.) to identify the property type, since
property entry IDs are not unique across property types. (Character: ELEM,
PBAR, PSHELL, etc.)
REGION Region identifier for constraint screening. (Integer > 0)
ATTA, ATTB,
ATTi
Response attributes. See Table 2-7. (Integer > 0 or Real or blank)
Main Index
47
CHAPTER 2
Remarks:
1. Fatigue item codes can be found in Table 2-8.
2. For RTYPE = FATIGUE, PTYPE must be set to ELEM or PSOLID or PSHELL. ATTB is the
ID of a FATIGUE case control. If a FATIGUE case control references a SET ID, then ATTB
must reference one of the IDs referenced by the SET.
3. Design optimization using fatigue responses is currently limited to one fatigue analysis, that is,
one loading sequence. Multiple fatigue responses referencing different loading sequences, i.e.,
FATIGUE case control IDs, will result in an error.
Remarks:
1. Element Group A consists of CHEXA, CPENTA, CTETRA, CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CQUADR,
CTRIA3, CTRIA6, CTRIAR, CSHEAR.
2. Also used for CTRIA3 and CSHEAR elements with LOC=ELEMENT option on FTGPARM.
Table 2-7 Design Sensitivity Response Attributes
Response
Type
(RTYPE)
Response Attributes
ATTA (Integer > 0)
ATTB (Integer > 0 or
Real > 0.0) ATTI (Integer > 0)
FATIGUE Fatigue Item Code. See
Remark 1.
ID of a FATIGUE case
control. See Remark 2.
and 3.
Property ID (PID) or
Element ID (EID)
Table 2-8 Fatigue Item Codes for LOC=ELEMENT on FTGPARM
Element Name
Real Element Data
Item Code Item
Element Group A 4 Fatigue life in Repeats of the loading sequence
5 Log of fatigue life in Repeats of the loading
sequence
6 Fatigue life in user defined fatigue equivalent units
7 Log of fatigue life in user defined fatigue
equivalent units
8 Fatigue damage
9 Log of fatigue damage
12 Scale factor from Factor of Safety analysis
Main Index
48
Table 2-9 Fatigue Item Codes for LOC=NODE on FTGPARM
Element Name Item Codes
Real Element Data
Item
Element Group B 4,15,26,37 Life in Repeats of the loading sequence
5,16,27,38 Log of life in Repeats of the loading sequence
6,17,28,39 Life in user defined fatigue equivalent units
7,18,29,40 Log of life in user defined equivalent units
8,19,30,41 Fatigue damage
9,20,31,42 Log of fatigue damage
12,23,34,45 Scale factor from Factor of Safety analysis
Element Group C 4,15,26 Fatigue life in Repeats of the loading sequence
5,16,27 Life in Repeats of the loading sequence
6,17,28 Log of life in Repeats of the loading sequence
7,18,29 Life in user defined fatigue equivalent units
8,19,30 Log of life in user defined equivalent units
9,20,31 Fatigue damage
12,23,34 Log of fatigue damage
Element Group D 4,15,26,37,48,59 Life in Repeats of the loading sequence
5,16,27,38,49,60 Log of life in Repeats of the loading sequence
6,17,28,39,50,61 Life in user defined fatigue equivalent units
7,18,29,40,51,62 Log of life in user defined equivalent units
8,19,30,41,52,63 Fatigue damage
9,20,31,42,53,64 Log of fatigue damage
12,23,34,45,56,67 Scale factor from Factor of Safety analysis
Element Group E 4,15,26,37,48,59,70,81 Life in Repeats of the loading sequence
5,16,27,38,49,60,71,82 Log of life in Repeats of the loading sequence
6,17,28,39,50,61,72,83 Life in user defined fatigue equivalent units
7,18,29,40,51,62,73,84 Log of life in user defined equivalent units
8,19,30,41,52,63,74,85 Fatigue damage
9,20,31,42,53,64,75,86 Log of fatigue damage
12,23,34,45,56,67,78,89 Scale factor from Factor of Safety analysis
Main Index
49
CHAPTER 2
Remarks:
1. Element Group A consists of CHEXA, CPENTA, CTETRA, CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CQUADR,
CTRIA3, CTRIA6, CTRIAR, CSHEAR.
2. Element Group B consists of elements with 4 corner nodes (CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CQUAD4,
CTETRA) and item codes are listed for Grids 1 through 4, respectively.
1. Element Group C consists of elements with 3 corner nodes: CTRIA6, CTRIAR, and item codes
are listed for Grids 1 through 3, respectively.
2. Element Group D consists of elements with 6 corner nodes: CPENTA, and item codes are listed
for Grids 1 through 6, respectively.
3. Element Group E consists of elements with 8 corner nodes: CHEXA, and item codes are listed
for Grids 1 through 8, respectively.
4. For CTRIA3 and CSHEAR elements, LOC=ELEMENT and LOC=NODE options on
FTGPARM use the same item codes in Table 2-8.
5. If it is desired to use a life response (or other item) for all nodes (using LOC=NODE on
FTGPARM), all item codes for the particular item are required, e.g., 4, 15, 26, and 37 for Element
Group B (one DRESP1 entry for each item code).
Main Index
Tips for Optimizing Performance
50
Tips for Optimizing Performance
Follow these tips to ensure your fatigue analysis runs as quickly as possible.
1. Set LOGLVL field on FTGPARM to something less than three (3). Ideally just leave it blank.
Set it to three (3) or higher for debugging purposes only.
2. Use as many threads as possible. This is set in the NTHRD field on FTGPARM bulk data entry.
Setting it to zero (0) will allow the progam to automatically select the number of threads available.
3. Use TOPSTR on FTGDEF entry to process only critically stressed locations.
4. Consider using RAINFLOW with GATE option on the FTGPARM entry.
5. Very large duty cycle jobs can result in many open files during the analysis proceedure. Make sure
your resource limits on your machine allow for this. The number of open files is typically set to
1024 by default. The installation manual explains how to change these limits.
6. Estimate the amount of memory that is needed. The amount of RAM (in words) needed is
approximately:
49 times the Number of Materials plus
(6+12) times the Number of Entities (nodes or elements) plus
Number of Time Steps in each Time History plus
6 times the Number of Entities times the Number of Load Cases (or Modes) plus
Small amounts for Events, tables, etc.
Using I8 doubles the requirement.
7. Therefore, the use of FTGDEF to limit the results on large models is very beneficial.
Main Index
Chapter 3: A Simple S-N Analysis
3
A Simple S-N Analysis
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Concluding Remarks
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
52
Problem Description
In this first example problem we start with a very simple model to introduce some fatigue analysis
concepts by investigating the Total Life, of the component shown below. For the purpose of this exercise
we will refer to it as the keyhole model as it is a keyhole shape notched component. A fully reversed
loading (p) of +/- 10,000 N is applied on the sample to open and close the notch. Clearly, the notch root
will see the highest stress. Because the model is symmetric about the notch, a half- model with a
symmetric boundary condition is all that is required.
Figure 3-1 The S-N Analysis of the Keyhole Model
Objective
To introduce the S-N fatigue life prediction method, commonly referred to as the
Stress-Life (S-N) or Total Life method.
Files Required
All files necessary to run this and subsequent examples are found in the test problem library
(nast/tpl/fatigue) directory in a complete MSC Nastran installation.
Table 3-1 Files Required
Files Required Description
simpleSN_v1.dat Simple S-N curve - fully reversed constant amplitude loading
simpleSN_v2.dat Simplified form of input file - equivalent to simpleSN_v1.dat
simpleSN_v3.dat Derived material S-N properties
Main Index
53
CHAPTER 3
simpleSN_v4a.dat Multiple constant mean S-N curves - 0.0 MPa mean
simpleSN_v4b.dat Multiple constant mean S-N curves - 100 MPa mean
simpleSN_v5.dat Multiple constant R-Ratio S-N curves
simpleSN_v6.dat Multiple constant life (Haigh) curves
simpeSN_v7.dat Bastanaire S-N curve
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
54
Fatigue Setup
This fatigue analysis is done using a linear static solution (SOL 101) with a load magnitude of 10,000
Newtons. The partial input deck is shown below. It is assumed that the user is familiar with the basic setup
of a standard SOL 101 job. Only the portions of the input deck dealing directly with the fatigue analysis
are explained here (see file simpleSN_v1.dat).
$
$ Keyhole Model (A Simple S-N Analysis)
$
SOL 101
CEND
$
TITLE = Keyhole Model (Simple SN)
$
FATIGUE(PRINT,FORMAT=0,BULK) = 44
$
SUBCASE 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 6
STRESS(SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
$
BEGIN BULK
PARAM POST -1
PARAM AUTOSPC YES
$
$ Fatigue Element Set Definition
$
SET4 21 PROP PSHELL 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21 211
PFTG 211 0 NONE
$
$ Fatigue Parameters
$
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
$
$ Fatigue Cyclic Loading
$
FTGSEQ 44
33 1.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
FTGEVNT 33 22
FTGLOAD 22 11 1 10000. 1.0 0.0
TABLFTG 11
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
$
$ Partial Listing of Elements and Element Property
$
PSHELL 1 1 9.525 1 1
CQUAD8 1 1 1 3 23 21 2 15
22 14 0. 0.
...etc.
Main Index
55
CHAPTER 3
$
$ Material Records
$
MAT1 1 203403. 78231.7 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 600.0 0.137
SN 8948.0 -0.2 2.e8 0.0
$
$ Partial Listing of Nodes of the Entire Model
$
GRID 1 63.8175 0. 0.
GRID 2 63.8283 .320863 0.
...etc.
$
$ Loads and Constraints
$
SPCADD 2 1 4
LOAD 6 1. 1. 1
$
$ Parital listing of Displacement Constraints
$
SPC1 1 2 1
...etc.
$
$ Nodal Force
$
FORCE 1 394 0 10000. 0. 1. 0.
$
ENDDATA
Case Control
In order to perform a fatigue analysis, there must be a FATIGUE case control:
FATIGUE(PRINT,FORMAT=0,BULK)=44
Note here that all defaults have been taken and are therefore, not necessary to specify. This case control
shows results in the same fatigue output request:
FATIGUE = 44
Fatigue output will be printed to the f06 file (PRINT) and no additional output formats will be saved
(FORMAT=0). The ID referenced is ID 44 of bulk data FTGDEF, FTGPARM, and FTGSEQ entries (BULK).
The analysis expects to find a FTGDEF, a FTGPARM, and FTGSEQ bulk data entry, each with ID=44.
The only bulk data entries that are absolutely required are the FTGSEQ (or FTGLOAD) and MATFTG.
If the other entries are not present, default values are used.
In this and all examples, the STRESS (or STRAIN) case control output request is also included, and
required to perform the actual fatigue analysis. Stresses are necessary for the fatigue analysis just as
displacements are supplied to determine the stresses.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
56
Material and Physical Properties
The FATIGUE case control calls out FTGDEF bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck defines
where on the model, or that is, which elements of the model, are to be included in the fatigue analysis.
The FTGDEF entry uses an ELSET flag to indicate that pairs of element sets and their corresponding
fatigue properties are to be defined. In this case only one pair is defined. That pair references a SET4
entry of ID 21 that defines all elements of element property PSHELL of ID 1. It associates these elements
defined by the SET4 entry to the physical fatigue properties defined by PFTG entry of ID 211.
$
$
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21 211
PFTG 211 0 NONE
Please note that since the entire model is included in the elements defined by the SET4 entry, it was not
actually necessary to define the element set as shown above. The same thing can be accomplished with
just these entries and by default all elements of the model are part of the fatigue analysis:
FTGDEF 44 211
PFTG 211 0 NONE
Because the PFTG entry uses all defaults, it too could have been omitted and only the FTGDEF entry
would be acceptable:
FTGDEF 44
But because the FTGDEF entry now defines no actual element sets or specific, non-default fatigue
properties, all elements become part of the fatigue analysis. So, it too could have been omitted. When the
FATIGUE case control finds no FTGDEF of the designated ID, it assumes all elements of the model that
have fatigue material properties are to be included in the fatigue analysis and uses default physical
properties (see file simpleSN_v2.dat), which brings us to the definition of fatigue material properties.
The presence of a MATFTG entry is required. The MATFTG entry must be associated to an existing MAT1
entry that defines Youngs Modulus, which is also required for a fatigue analysis. In this example, all
elements are associated to PSHELL of ID 1, which references MAT1 of ID1. Therefore MATFTG of ID
1 is also referenced by the PSHELL entry.
$
$ Material Records
$
MAT1 1 203403. 78231.7 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 600.0
SN 8948.0 -0.2 2.e8 0.0 0.137
In the MATFTG entry above, there are two lines of data specified by the STATIC and the SN flags.
On the STATIC line the UTS is entered and is required (or YS). Since only the additional SN flag is
specified, nothing else on the STATIC line is necessary. The SN flag indicates that parameters that
define a stress-life curve are to be entered. All the stress parameters in this example are given in units of
Main Index
57
CHAPTER 3
MPa. (Please see the section below about stress parameter units - Model Units.) If plotted, the stress-life
curve for the data given appears as such:
Figure 3-2 Material S-N Curve
The Concept of Similitude
As can be surmised by the above, life can be determined by simply looking up the corresponding stress.
An S-N curve is based on the principle of similitude. This simply means that if we can reproduce the
same stress as that experienced in, say, Tower Bridge, in a test laboratory specimen made of the same
material, then we can expect the life of the two to be about the same, if subjected to the same levels of
stress.
Note: A portion of the S-N curve includes a region where the S-N curve is invalid. The S-N fatigue
analysis method is generally only good for High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) problems, meaning
that the number of cycles to failure is generally very high. Note that this invalid region is
generally below about 10
4
cycles. Another region of the curve is the cut-off region where the
endurance limit is defined 10
8
. Anything above this limit will be reported back as being
beyond the cut-off (infinite life, in other words).
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
58

Figure 3-3 Tower Bridge and the Concept of Similitude
Material vs. Component S-N Curves
Different types of S-N curves exist. The one used in this example is known as a Material S-N curve where
this principle of similitude is applicable. However, be aware of another type of S-N curve known as a
component S-N curve.
Material S-N curves are representative of the material and independent of geometry. They relate local
stress (o) to life.
Some S-N curves are generated where the actual component geometry itself as well as the material have
been used in tests to create the S-N curve. This type of S-N curve is called a Component S-N curve. These
types of curves relate nominal stress (S) to life and are dependent on the geometry of the component. If
you change the geometry, the curve will no longer be valid. The nominal stress is a location away from
the actual failure location. This is usually because it is impossible to place a measurement device such as
a strain gauge in the failure location. The point of measurement is sometimes referred to as the Reference
Location. Thus, the fatigue analysis of models using these types of curves must localize the analysis to
the area of the reference location as fatigue life reported from anywhere else will not be correct.
Model Units
Nastran is a unitless code, meaning that the user must ensure all units are consistent. One thing to be very
aware of when doing fatigue analysis is the consistent model units, particularly the units of stress. Fatigue
material properties must be entered in the models consistent units unless the CNVRT field is used. In
this example the material stress parameters such as Youngs Modulus (E) and other parameters defining
the S-N curve are in MPa, which is consistent with the rest of the model units (length units in millimeters,
force units in Newtons). Stresses from the analysis are in MPa.
Main Index
59
CHAPTER 3
Should you wish to input any values on the MATFTG entry in units other than the models consistent
units, the CNVRT field (field 3 on the 1st line of MATFTG) must be used to convert the stress parameters
from whatever units they are in, to the models consistent units. The conversion scaling is only applied
to those stress parameters on the MATFTG or referenced by MATFTG in TABLEM1 entries.
When a fatigue analysis is initiated, all fatigue material stress parameters, including Youngs modulus
on the MAT1 entry are converted to SI units of MPa internally. All stresses from the analysis are also
converted to MPa so that the look up on the stress-life curve is done properly and consistently. In order
for this to occur, the analysis stress units must also be identified to the fatigue analysis. This is done on
the DTI,UNITS entry like this:
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
MPa is the default stress units! This entry is not needed for this example because our stress units are
already in MPa and our fatigue material stress parameters are entered in MPa, which is the models
consistent stress units. Subsequent examples where the models stress units are in PSI will better
illustrate the use of the DTI,UNITS entry.
Deriving Materials Properties
As a side note, what if you do not have access to specific fatigue material properties yet you still want to
do a fatigue analysis?
By using the MATFTG entry with only the STATIC line, the UTS, and a material code, plus Youngs
Modulus from the MAT1 entry, appropriate cyclic material properties (an S-N curve in this case) are
derived automatically (see input deck simpleSN_v3.dat).
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
60
Fatigue Parameters
The FATIGUE case control also calls out FTGPARM bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck
defines various fatigue analysis parameters. These will be introduced as applicable throughout the
remaining examples. For this example, the FTGPARM entry uses all defaults.
$
$
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
The most important parameter to note is the third field (TYPE) where the actual fatigue analysis type is
specified, in this case an S-N analysis (SN). The 1.0 in field four is an overall scale factor that can be
applied to the resultant stresses. Because all the defaults are used, this entry could have been omitted (see
file simpleSN_v2.dat). When the FATIGUE case control finds no FTGPARM of the designated ID, it
assumes an S-N analysis using all default parameters.
For this example, this same entry could have been included with all the defaults as:
$
$
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPR NONE NODE
CERTNTY 50.0
These are shown here to emphasize a few things that occur during the analysis.
1. First the STRESS flag indicates that stresses are to be used in the fatigue analysis, which is the
only option for a S-N analysis.
2. Second is the 6th field on the STRESS line, which is set to NODE. This specifies that the fatigue
analysis is to be performed at all the nodes of each element defined by the FTGDEF entry.
3. Third is the stress combination used to actually look up life from the S-N curve. This is specified
in the STRESS line. The ABSMAXPR in the 3rd field of this line is the scalar Stress
Combination and corresponds to the absolute maximum principal stress. This is the stress
parameter that is used in the fatigue analysis. The stress tensor from the FE analysis results is
extracted at each elements node. However only a single stress value can be looked up on the S-
N curve. So the six component values of the stress tensor are resolved to the maximum absolute
principal value which is used as the stress look up parameter.
4. Fourth is the Mean Stress Correction to take place. In this case no mean stress correction (NONE)
is to take place. More will be mentioned about this below in the discussion of the cyclic loading.
5. Fifth is the Certainty of Survival set on the line with the CRTNTY flag. It is set to 50.0% by
default. This uses the scatter in the S-N data to adjust the fatigue life prediction accordingly. A
higher certainty will produce a lower life prediction and vice versa. Thus a value of 50.0 means
that there is a 50% probability that the reported life will be reached. A value of 95.0 means that a
95% chance of reaching the reported life.
Main Index
61
CHAPTER 3
Cyclic Loading
The load applied in the FE model is a static load of 10,000 N. Fatigue analysis employs a pseudo-static
method where the cyclic variation of the static loading must be defined. The time signal used in this
analysis is a fully reversed loading. Cyclic loading is sometimes described using a parameter called the
R-Ratio (R), which is the minimum load divided by the maximum load. R is a measure of the mean
stress or defines the constant mean of a signal. R = -1 for a fully reversed loading.
The S-N curve used in this example was generated by testing numerous polished test specimens at
different constant amplitude, fully reversed (R= -1) loading conditions. The parameter or power law that
defines the S-N curve was determined by Regression Analysis, of the raw data. Therefore no Mean
Stress Correction is required since there is no mean stress to speak of (the mean stress is zero). This is
why NONE is specified as the correction method on the FTGPARM entry.
Now, in order to do a fatigue analysis using linear static FE results, we must define how the load varies
with time. This is easily done using the bulk data entries FTGSEQ, FTGEVNT, FTGLOAD, and
TABLFTG. The load is defined as a constant amplitude, fully reversed loading. This will have the effect
of oscillating the 10,000 N load from +10,000 to -10,000 N.
A single occurrence of this fully reversed, constant amplitude signal is defined as one cycle of the loading
(for more information please visit Cycles (cycle counting). The X points are taken as evenly spaced
intervals (see Sample Rate).
Figure 3-4 Display of Unit Load, Fully Reversed Load
The FATIGUE case control also calls out FTGSEQ bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck
defines the cyclic load variation. A FTGSEQ entry is required or an error will be issued (see exception
below).
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
62
$
$
FTGSEQ 44
33 1.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
FTGEVNT 33 22
FTGLOAD 22 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
TABLFTG 11
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
A FTGSEQ entry defines a sequence of load events. A FTGEVNT entry groups different cyclic loads into
a single event (simultaneously acting loads). A FTGLOAD entry defines the relationship between the FE
stresses from a particular SOL 101 subcase and the corresponding cyclic variation of the stresses due to
the loading from that subcase. The TABLFTG entry defines the actual cyclic load variation.
More will be elaborated on FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT as the loading become more complicated in
subsequent examples. For now, suffice it to say that there is only one load in the event and only one event
in the load sequence. So for all intense purposes, the input could be simplified to reference only the
FTGLOAD entry as such (see file simpleSN_v2.dat):
$
$
$ ID TID LCID LDM SCALE OFFSET TYPE
$ -- --- ---- --- ----- ------ ----
FTGLOAD 44 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
TABLFTG 11
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
The above simplification shows that the FATIGUE case control calls out the FTGLOAD entry instead of
the FTGSEQ. This is the one exception where a FTGSEQ entry is not required, if replaced by a single
FTGLOAD entry. Only a single load (one subcase) is possible in this case.
The FTGLOAD entry defines the simple load variation in tabular format, also plotted in Figure 3-4. Note
that only Y-values are necessary using a TABLFTG entry. Evenly spaced X-values are assumed. The time
or distance between the values is ignored. More explanation on this is given in the next example. A
TABLED1 entry could also be used and referenced by the FTGLOAD entry in the 3rd field. If a
TABLED1 is used, the X-values must be in ascending order. Again the actual X-values or distance
between each in time is of no consequence to the actual fatigue analysis.
The FTGLOAD entry associates the actual cyclic variation of the stresses from a particular subcase to the
subcase itself. Field 3 points to the TABLFTG or TABLED1 entry and field 4 points to the SUBCASE ID.
The other three fields are for normalizing, scaling, and offsetting the stresses. In this case, no additional
normalization, scaling or offsetting is done. But for the purposes of understanding when to use these the
following explanation is given.
Main Index
63
CHAPTER 3
Load Normalizing, Scaling and Offsets
The FE stress results from a subcase can be scaled in several different ways using the Load Magnitude
(B), Scale Factor (A) and Offset (C). The stress time or cyclic variation is determined as:
where,
P(t) is the cyclic load as a variation of time
is the stress tensor from the subcase
A is the Scale Factor (field 6)
B is the Load Magnitude (field 5)
C is the Offset (field 7)
If the stress results are to be used as-is, then Load Magnitude and Scale Factor should be set to unity and
Offset to zero. Thus the cyclic variation will oscillate between its own maximum and minimum. To scale
the stress by 10 times, use a time history that oscillates between +/-1, and a Scale Factor of 10.0.
The Load Magnitude is normally used to normalize the stress results to simulate a unit load. In this
example a Load Magnitude of 10,000 could be specified to normalize the stress due to a unit load. Then
the TABLFTG entry could oscillate between +/-10,000 to achieve the same cyclic loading.
The Offset is used to simulate the same static stress offset across all elements of interest in the fatigue
analysis. The value must be input in the same stress units as the model.
Fatigue Equivalent Units
The second line of the FTGSEQ entry (or the FTGLOAD entry) has a flag called UNITS set. If this line
is present, then fatigue equivalent units are defined by setting fields three and four on this line. Fatigue
equivalent units are a convenient way to have the fatigue analysis report back life results in meaningful
terms that an engineer or anyone can understand. If no fatigue equivalent units are defined, then the
fatigue life is reported back as Repeats of the cyclic load variation or Repeats of the time history applied
to the static loading.
In this example, one cycle of fully reversed loading is defined. Therefore, one repeat of the cyclic loading
can be called a cycle. So the results of the fatigue analysis will be reported back in both Repeats of the
cyclic loading and as Cycles. Because one Repeat is also one Cycle, in this example, it does not have
much meaning. Subsequent examples show more meaningful fatigue equivalent units, such as laps
around a test track, or flights of an aircraft, or hours of operation.
o
ij
t ( ) P t ( )
Ao
ij
B
----------- C + =
o
ij
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
64
Fatigue Results
Run the simpleSN_v1.dat file using a supported version of MSC Nastran (> 2013). Then inspect the
simplesn_v1.f06 file. The lowest life on node 1 of element 1 show just under half a million cycles (10
5.64

= 436,515 cycles).
Listing 3-1 Fatigue Life and Damage for Nodes of Element 1
Note that both Life, Repeats, and Life, Cycles, are available result types. Both show the exact same result.
The Life, Repeats, is the default result value and will indicate the number of repeats of the time history
the model has survived. The Cycles is a user defined fatigue unit to describe more accurately what
Repeats of the time signal may mean. For example, it could represent a number of Flights of an aircraft,
or Laps around a test track, or Hours of operation. In this case it is a single Cycle.
The Log life, Cycles reveals the log (base 10) of the fatigue life. This output is available mostly for post-
processing reason in a graphical pre- and post-processor to make the contour bands more readable as life
and damage results tend to have very high gradients (from infinite life to no life). The log values help
spread out the contour bands.
Damage is the reciprocal of life.
Figure 3-5 Log of Life (Cycles)
EVENT ID ALL EVENTS FATIGUE ID 44
F A T I G U E R E S P O N S E I N Q U A D 8 E L E M E N T S OPTION =NODE
ELEMENT GRID LAYER LIFE LOG-LIFE LIFE LOG-LIFE DAMAGE LOG MAXIMUM MINIMUM SAFETY
ID ID ( REPEATS ) (CYCLES ) DAMAGE STRESS STRESS FACTOR
1 1 Z1 0.4367E+06 5.640 0.4367E+06 5.640 0.2290E-05 -5.640 0.3332E+03 -0.3332E+03
3 Z1 0.4566E+06 5.660 0.4566E+06 5.660 0.2190E-05 -5.660 0.3302E+03 -0.3302E+03
23 Z1 0.3751E+07 6.574 0.3751E+07 6.574 0.2666E-06 -6.574 0.2167E+03 -0.2167E+03
21 Z1 0.3476E+07 6.541 0.3476E+07 6.541 0.2877E-06 -6.541 0.2200E+03 -0.2200E+03
Main Index
65
CHAPTER 3
Concluding Remarks
This was a very simple analysis, the results of which should be obvious. The lowest life was naturally
predicted at the highest stressed location. Because the loading was simple, perhaps a detailed fatigue
analysis as performed here, was not necessary. In fact you could have simply extracted the highest
principal stress (333 MPa) and gone directly to the plotted S-N curve to read the life. This, of course,
starts to become very impractical with anything much more complicated as you will see in subsequent
examples.
Range vs. Amplitude
To read the correct life value from the curve for this exercise, you must multiply the maximum principal
stress at Node 1 by two (666 MPa) since the total range of the signal is twice the stress determined by
the FE analysis since it is experiencing full reversal. See glossary terms Range vs. Amplitude.
Plasticity in S-N Analysis
A note on Plasticity: Fatigue cannot occur without some local plasticity. The S-N method makes no effort
to define the amount of plasticity or compensate for it in any specific manner. All plasticity is built into
the S-N curve itself.
Mean Stress
Various methods exist for compensating for non-zero mean stress. The material S-N data used is
typically derived using zero mean stress. The actual loading experienced does not typically result in zero
mean stress. One method used is to use multiple S-N curves derived at different constant mean stresses
or R-ratios. There is also a method using a Haigh Diagram, which constitutes a number of stress range
vs. stress mean curves at constant life. The multi-curve analysis methods employ empirical data to
account for mean stress effects rather than analytical methods such as Gerber and Goodman, which are
illustrated in the next Chapter.
Constant Mean Stress S-N Curves
Here is example input for defining multiple constant mean (MEAN) stress S-N curves (see
simpleSN_v4a.dat). Note that three curves are defined, one each at -50.0 MPa, 0.0 MPa, and 100.0
MPa mean stress, respectively.
FATIGUE = 44
$
BEGIN BULK
$
SET1 21 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21
FTGPARM 44 SN
STRESS ABSMAXPR INTERP NODE 0
$
FTGLOAD 44 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
TABLFTG 11
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
66
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
$
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
$ Description of Material : MANTEN M-M
MAT1 1 203403. 78231.7 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 552.0 99 MEAN 0.3
TABLE -50.0 31 0.0 32 100.0 33
TABLEM1 31
7729.0 800.0 3.152+4 700.0 1.6+5 600.0 1.08+6 500.0
1.14+7 400.0 5.12+8 300.0 1.74+12 200.0 ENDT
TABLEM1 32
3102.0 800.0 1.2651+4 700.0 6.4098+4 600.0 4.369+5 500.0
4.576+6 400.0 9.45+7 300.0 3.05+11 200.0 3.3+17 100.0
ENDT
TABLEM1 33
52.0 800.0 1542.0 700.0 7819.0 600.0 5.3289+4 500.0
5.5814+5 400.0 1.15+7 300.0 5.546+9 200.0 6.03+15 100.0
ENDT
Figure 3-6 Multiple Constant Mean Stress S-N Curves
Main Index
67
CHAPTER 3
Knowing the maximum stress range of 666 MPa for this simple, zero mean loading, we can simply read
the life from the zero-mean curve, interpolating between the 600.0 and 700.0 MPa levels (TABLEM1
32), giving approximately 21,000 cycles. If the OFFSET field on the FTGLOAD entry is set to 0.3,
FTGLOAD 44 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.3
that will yield an offset range mean of 100 MPa (recall that the cyclic loading contains absolute peak
values of +/-1). A 100.0 MPa mean stress S-N curve exists as TABLEM1 of ID 33 above. Looking up
666 MPa on the 100 MPa curve gives life of approximately 2,600 cycles (see simpleSN_v4b.dat).
When CORR=INTERP on the FTGPARM entry (to indicate that the mean stress correction is to
interpolate between curves), there must be a curve defined at zero mean or the mean stress correction
will fail. Curves are defined as stress range vs life in cycles (TYPE=MEAN on MATFTG) or stress
amplitude vs life in cycles (TYPE=AMEAN on MATFTG). Stresses should be entered in the model
consistent units unless the CNVRT field on MATFTG is used to convert input stress values to the model
consistent units.
Constant R-Ratio S-N Curves
Here is an example input for defining multiple constant R-ratio (RRATIO) S-N curves (see
simpleSN_v5.dat). Note that five curves are defined, one each at -1.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.5 R-ratio,
respectively. Again, with this simple example and no stress offset, the life will be read directly from the
R=-1 curve. If a mean offset is given, interpolation between the curves will occur.
FATIGUE = 44
$
BEGIN BULK
$
SET1 21 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21
FTGPARM 44 SN
$
FTGLOAD 44 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
TABLFTG 11
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
$
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
$ Description of Material : Wrought AlAlloy 7075-T6510 RR
MAT1 1 7.0E4 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 585.0 105 RRATIO 0.0
TABLE -1.0 31 -0.4 32 0.0 33
0.2 34 0.5 35
TABLEM1 31
1.0E4 820.0 1.0E5 550.0 1.0E6 350.0 1.0E7 300.0
ENDT
TABLEM1 32
1.0E4 650.0 1.0E5 435.0 1.0E6 315.0 1.0E7 265.0
ENDT
TABLEM1 33
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
68
1.0E4 525.0 1.0E5 365.0 1.0E6 280.0 1.0E7 245.0
ENDT
TABLEM1 34
1.0E4 440.0 1.0E5 325.0 1.0E6 255.0 1.0E7 225.0
ENDT
TABLEM1 35
1.0E4 295.0 1.0E5 250.0 1.0E6 200.0 1.0E7 175.0
ENDT
Figure 3-7 Multiple Constant R-Ratio S-N Curves
When CORR=INTERP on the FTGPARM entry (to indicate that the mean stress correction is to
interpolate between curves), there must be a curve defined at R = -1 (zero mean) or the mean stress
correction will fail. Curves are defined as stress range vs life in cycles (TYPE=RRATIO on MATFTG) or
stress amplitude vs life in cycles (TYPE=ARRATIO on MATFTG). Stresses should be entered in the
model consistent units unless the CNVRT field on MATFTG is used to convert input stress values to the
model consistent units.
Main Index
69
CHAPTER 3
Constant Life (Haigh) Curves
Here is an example input for defining constant life Haigh (ALIFE) curves (see simpleSN_v6.dat). Note
that six curves are defined, one each at 1.0E4, 1.0E5, 1.0E6, 1.0E7, 1.0E8, and 5.0E8 constant life
(cycles), respectively.
FATIGUE = 44
$
BEGIN BULK
$
SET1 21 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21
FTGPARM 44 SN
$
FTGLOAD 44 11 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
TABLFTG 11
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
$
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
$ Description of Material : Wrought AlAlloy 7075-T6510 (Haigh)
MAT1 1 6.9E4 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 565.0 105 ALIFE 0.0
TABLE 1.0E4 31 1.0E5 32 1.0E6 33
1.0E7 34 1.0E8 35 5.0E8 36
TABLEM1 31
0.0 363.0 107.5 322.5 252.5 252.5 412.5 137.5
ENDT
TABLEM1 32
-95.0 285.0 0.0 260.0 77.5 232.5 190.0 190.0
379.5 126.5 ENDT
TABLEM1 33
-69.0 207.0 0.0 190.0 60.0 180.0 155.0 155.0
315.0 105.0 ENDT
TABLEM1 34
-55.0 165.0 0.0 150.0 49.0 147.0 127.5 127.0
285.0 95.0 ENDT
TABLEM1 35
-52.5 157.5 0.0 145.0 45.0 135.0 120.0 120.0
273.8 91.25 ENDT
TABLEM1 36
-47.5 142.5 0.0 135.0 40.5 121.5 115.0 115.0
270.0 90.0 ENDT
CORR=INTERP on the FTGPARM entry should be set to indicate that the mean stress correction is to
interpolate between curves or an error will occur. Curves are defined as stress range vs mean stress
(TYPE=LIFE on MATFTG) or stress amplitude vs mean stress (TYPE=ALIFE on MATFTG). Stresses
should be entered in the model consistent units unless the CNVRT field on MATFTG is used to convert
input stress values to the model consistent units.
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
70
Figure 3-8 Multiple Constant Life Haigh Curves
The Bastenaire Approach
This is another S-N curve definition. With this approach, the scatter of the fatigue tests can be used to
formulate some probability of failure (assuming a normal distribution of failures at a given stress level).
Thus, a certainty of survival is formally introduced into the S-N computation. (See input file
simpleSN_v7.dat.)
The Bastenaire S-N curve formulation is as follows:
The parameters in this formulation are described below.
$ Description of Material : Generic Steel Bastenaire Data
MAT1 1 2.0E5 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 600.0 99 AMPL -1.0
BASTEN 7.0E6 95.0 1.5 125.0 0.0
N
A
S E
b
----------------
S E
b
B
----------------
.
|
c
\
|
exp =
Main Index
71
CHAPTER 3
Table 3-2 Bastenaire Parameters
Parameter Name Description
2
Material Type Numeric code defining the type of material. The material type is required
for correct application of surface finish and stress gradient corrections.
UTS Ultimate tensile strength. This is required to apply the static failure
criterion
E Modulus of elasticity
A Bastenaire coefficient a parameter positioning the curve along the life
axis
B Scale factor parameter
C Bastenaire exponent
E
b
Bastenaire fatigue limit
RR R-ratio of test
Stress Type Amplitude, Range or Maximum
S Bastenaire scatter factor
Main Index
Patran Setup
72
Patran Setup
This section explains how to run the examples in this Chapter through Patran. It is assumed that the user
is familiar with Patran operations. Only generic steps are given here and not in depth explanations of how
to perform each operation. Any graphic images shown are from the Windows platform. Forms are similar
for Linux but will appear differently than the Windows forms shown here.
Step 1: Import the Model
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it simpleSN. Use the Analysis application
(or tab) to import the first input deck associated with this example: simpleSN_v1.dat.
(Action=Read Input File) Make sure the Analysis Preference is set to MSC.Nastran.
Step 2: Check the Model
Go to the Loads/BCs application (or tab). Plot the LBC markers (Action=Plot Markers). Make
sure the Current Load Case is the imported load case (Untitled.SC1). Select all the LBCs and
press the Apply button. You should see the constraints and 10,000 N load.
Go to the Materials application (or Properties tab, then click on Isotropic ribbon icon). Set the
Action to Modify and select mat1.1. Note the values in the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If
there is no current Stress-Life (SN) constitutive model, create one. If there is, verify the following
parameters, which are written to the MATFTG entry:
Go to the Element Properties application (or Properties tab). Set the Action to Modify. Select the
property pshell.1. Note the properties defined here. Additional fatigue properties can be defined
here but are not. Thus all defaults are used for this example, so there is no need to modify
anything. Values for the fatigue properties, if defined, are placed on the PFTG entry. All other
pertinent properties are part of the PSHELL entry and related elements for this model.
Parameter Value
Constitutive Model: Stress-Life (SN)
Option: Standard Parameters
Material (CODE): Ferrous (99)
Stress: None
Curve Type: None
Ultimate Tensile Strength 600.0 MPa
Stress Range Intercept 8948.0 MPa
1st Strength Exponent -0.2
Transition Point 2.0E8
2nd Strength Exponent 0.0
Standard Error of Log(N) 0.137
Main Index
73
CHAPTER 3
Go to the Fields application (or Properties tab and click on one of the Fields ribbon icons). If there
is no Non Spatial field defining the unit load oscillation, then define one. (Action=Create,
Object=Non Spatial, Method=Tabular Input) Call it UnitLoad. Use Time (t) as the independent
variable. You need to define 4 points at say, 0, 1, 2, and 3 seconds with values 0.0, 1.0, -1.0, and
0.0. The time values are arbitrary. They just need to be in ascending order. This field will be
referenced later when associating it to the 10,000 N subcase. This field defines the TABLFTG
entry.
Step 3: Check the Fatigue Parameters
Go to the Analysis application (Action = Analyze). Since we read the existing job
simpleSN_v1.dat, a job by the name of simplesn_v1 has been created. Click on it to restore all its
settings. Open the Solution Type... form and then open the Solution Parameters... form. From
here you can check the Fatigue Parameters... Open this form and ensure the following
parameters are set, which are written to the FTGPARM entry. If a parameter is not mentioned
below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done using the OK
buttons.
Parameter Value
General Parameters:
Stress Units: MPa
Stress Combination: Abs. Max. Principal
Results Loc.: Node
Stress-Life (S-N):
Run SN Analysis Turn this ON
Mean Stress Correction: None
Main Index
Patran Setup
74
Step 4: Request the Appopriate Output File
Also, in order to post-process the fatigue results in Patran, make sure that the results are written
to the MASTER/DBALL files. This is done in the Solution Parameters... form by opening the
Results Output Format... form and turning ON the MASTER/DBALL toggle.
Step 5: Check the Output Requests
Still in the Analysis application, click on the Subcases... form. Our subcase is called
Untitled.SC1. Click on it from the Available Subcases list box to access all its settings. Then open
the Output Requests... form. It is best to set this form to the advanced setting (Form Type:).
If FATIGUE is not already defined as an Output Request, then do so by selecting Fatigue Life
from the top list box. This defines the FATIGUE case control as well as the FTGDEF bulk data
entry. By default all elements that have an S-N material defined are included in the analysis in
which case a FTGDEF entry is not actually needed. At this point, nothing further is need to be
defined on this form unless you want to limit the elements included in the analysis in which case
you would select items from the two top list boxes on the right side of the form in advanced mode.
One last note about output requests. Fatigue life output requests are subcase independent unlike
most standard output requests such as stress and displacement. If you are using multiple subcases,
the first subcase selected (see the next step) must have the Fatigue Life output request in it.
When done inspecting this form and adding the fatigue output request, close the form and press
the Apply button on the Subcases... form to store the changes to this subcase.
Main Index
75
CHAPTER 3
Step 6: Check the Cyclic Load Definition
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). The only subcase
that should be in the bottom list box is Untitled.SC1. Now open the Define Fatigue Load
Sequences... form. On this form ensure that the loading associations are set up properly. For the
simple loading in this example, we want to define a single load event (Event: 1) that associates
our 10,000 N subcase called Untitled.SC1 to the load variation defined by the non spatial field
created or inspected earlier.
Click on the cell under the Subcase column in the spreadsheet and then select the subcase from
the bottom list box. The next cell should become selected or active.
Click on the cell under the Time History column, if necessary, and select the Non-spatial Field
from the appropriate list box. The cell just needs to be selected and active to make selection. The
single load event is now defined.
Use the right mouse button to click on the Load Sequences and Add a New Sequence. Then right
mouse buttom click on the new sequence and Add Event. Select the one and only event from the
list box that appears and press Apply. The load sequence is now defined.
Data on this form defines the FTGSEQ/FTGEVNT/FTGLOAD entries. You can close this form
with the OK button.
Main Index
Patran Setup
76
Step 7: Run the Analysis
Press the Apply button on the Analysis application form to submit the job (Method=Full Run).
It is assumed that Patran has been configured to properly run the correct version of MSC.Nastran.
Step 8: View the Results
When the job is complete, attach the MSC Nastran database to Patran to view the results. Still in
the Analysis application, set Action=Access Results, Object=Attach MASTER, and
Method=Result Entities. Select the simplesn_v1.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Go to the Results application and view the results by selecting Log of Damage or Log of Life,
Repeats.
Main Index
77
CHAPTER 3
Step 9: Run other Fatigue Jobs
To run the other jobs from this Chapter, you can import each input deck into a new empty database and
repeat the steps here making modifications as necessary and shown below for each different input deck.
Or you can define new jobs in the same database by selecting the existing job simpleSN_v1 and then
renaming it and making the modifications as necessary. The table below lists the modifications necessary
for each:
Input Deck Modification
simpleSN_v1.dat Baseline - no modifications necessary
simpleSN_v2.dat No modifications necessary - Patran will always write FTGSEQ,
FTGEVNT, and FTGLOAD even for the simplest loading. This
example input deck just shows that MSC Nastran does not actually
need FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT for a simple load as illustrated in this
Chapter.
simpleSN_v3.dat In the Materials application select the Stress-Life (SN) constitutive
model and change it so Option: Derived, Material (CODE):
Ferrous (99), Stress: None, Curve Type: None. Only UTS needs to
be defined as 600 MPa. Note that changing an existing material will
change this for all defined jobs that have elements associated with
this material.
simpleSN_v4a & _v4b.dat In the Fields application, create three SN curves called SN-50, SN0,
SN100. (Action=Create, Object=Material Property,
Method=Tabular Input) The independent variable must be Life (N).
Enter the data for each S-N curve as Stress (Data) vs. Life (N).
In the Materials application select the Stress-Life (SN) constitutive
model and change it so Option: Tabular, Material (CODE):
Ferrous (99), Stress: Range, Curve Type: Constant Mean. UTS
needs to be defined as 552 MPa and SE as 0.3. For Value 1, 2, & 3
enter -50.0, 0.0, and 100.0. For SN Curve 1, 2, & 3, select the
corresponding material Fields created earlier.
Mean Stress Correction should be set to Interpolate in the Fatigue
Parameters... form. The Interpolation Limit should be set to Use
Max. Curve for simpleSN_v4a.dat and Extrapolate for
simpleSN_v4b.dat.
For simpleSN_v4b.dat, change the Offset on the Define Fatigue
Load Sequences... to 0.3
Main Index
Patran Setup
78
simpleSN_v5.dat Similar setup as simpleSN_v4a.dat with some exceptions. Of course
the SN curves are different. Create the five S-N curves using the
Fields application as before and call them SN_RR-1, SN_RR-.4,
SN_RR0, SN_RR.2, SN_RR.5. Modify the Stress-Life (SN)
constitutive model to use these S-N curves as Curve Type=Constant
R-Ratio and enter Value 1-5 as -1.0, -0.4, 0.0, 0.2, and 0.5. In addition
to this, the material was changed to use Wrought AlAlloy 7075-
T6510. So set the Material (CODE):Aluminium (100). The Elastic
constitutive model has to be modified to use E=7.0E4 and the UTS
is now 585.0 MPa and SE = 0.0.
Max. Curve.
simpleSN_v6.dat Similar setup as simpleSN_v4a.dat with some exceptions. Of course
the S-N curves are different and this time must be entered as mean
stress (Data) vs. stress amplitude (Life (N)). You still use Life (N) as
the independent variable even though for a Haigh curve the
independent variable is stress amplitude.
Create the six Haigh curves and call them HAIGH1e4, HAIGH1e5,
HAIGH1e6, HAIGH1e7, HAIGH1e8, HAIGH5e8. Modify the
Stress-Life (SN) constitutive model to use these Haigh curves as
Stress=Amplitude, Curve Type=Constant Life and enter Value 1-6
as 1e4, 1e5, 1e6, 1e7, 1e8 and 5e8. In addition to this, the material
was changed to us Wrought AlAlloy 7075-T6510. So the Elastic
constitutive model has to be modified to use E=6.9E4 and the UTS
is now 565.0 MPa with SE = 0.0. Material (CODE):Aluminium
(100).
Max. Curve.
simpleSN_v7.dat Identical setup as simpleSN_v1.dat except in the Materials
application select the Stress-Life (SN) constitutive model and change
it so Option=Bastenaire Parameters, Material (CODE)=Ferrous
(99), Stress=Amplitude, Curve Type=None. Use the parameters
defined in this Chapter for the Bastenaire S-N curve definition with
the UTS being 600.0 MPa and R-Ratio being -1.0. In addition to this,
change the Elastic constitutive model to use E=2.0E5
Mean Stress Correction should be set to None in the Fatigue
Parameters... form.
Main Index
Chapter 4: Rainflow Cycle Counting
4
Rainflow Cycle Counting
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Concluding Remarks
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
80
Problem Description
This example is an extension of the previous example where the simple constant amplitude loading is
replaced with a more complex randomly varying time signal. Please review the previous chapter before
reading this chapter as this chapter builds on the concepts already introduced.
Figure 4-1 Varying Load Signal, saetrn.dac
Objective
To predict the life of the keyhole subject to a varying load signal.
To understand how to normalize the FE stresses.
To introduce the concept to Rainflow Cycle Counting.
To introduce the concept of Damage Summation.
To investigate the effect of Mean stress.
To investigate the probabilistic nature of fatigue.
Files Required
RFCount_v1.dat Original Input File - Entire model
RFCount_v2.dat Original Input File - Element 1 only
RFCount_v3.dat Time history compression, Entire Model
RFCount_v4.dat Mean Stress Correction, Certainty of Survival (MANTEN_MSN)
RFCount_v5.dat Mean Stress Correction, Certainty of Survival (RQC100_MSN)
Main Index
81
CHAPTER 4
RFCount_v6.dat Multiple Constant Mean Stress S-N Curves
RFCount_v7.dat Multiple Constant Mean Stress S-N Curves - w/ Interpolation
RFCount_v8.dat Multiple Constant R-Ratio S-N Curves
RFCount_v9.dat Multiple Constant Life (Haigh) Curves
RFCount_v10.dat Bastenaire S-N Curve
RFCount_v11.dat Factor of Safety Analysis
saetrn.dac Cyclic load definition file
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
82
Fatigue Setup
This fatigue analysis is set up almost exactly as the example in the previous chapter using a linear static
solution (SOL 101) with a load magnitude of 10,000 Newtons. The difference is the cyclic loading
definition. Thus, only this portion of the input deck is explained in detail. No FTGDEF and FTGPARM
entries are used since all the elements of the model are included in the fatigue analysis and an S-N
analysis using all default parameters is all that is necessary for this example. The partial input deck is
shown below (see file RFCount_v1.dat).
$
$ Keyhole Model (Rainflow Cycle Counting)
$
SOL 101
CEND
$
TITLE = Keyhole Model (Rainflow Cycle Counting)
$
FATIGUE = 44
$
SUBCASE 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 6
$
BEGIN BULK
PARAM POST -1
PARAM AUTOSPC YES
$
$
FTGLOAD 44 18 1 10000. 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 18
./saetrn.dac
$
$ Partial Listing of Elements and Element Property
$
PSHELL 1 1 9.525 1 1
CQUAD8 1 1 1 3 23 21 2 15
22 14 0. 0.
CQUAD8 2 1 3 5 25 23 4 16
24 15 0. 0.
...
CQUAD8 224 1 807 809 826 824 808 815
825 814 0. 0.
$
$ Material Records - for MANTEN_MSN
$
MAT1 1 203403. 78231.7 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 600.0 0.137
SN 8948.0 -0.2 2.e8 0.0
$
$ Partial Listing of Nodes of the Entire Model
Main Index
83
CHAPTER 4
$
GRID 1 63.8175 0. 0.
GRID 2 63.8283 .320863 0.
...
GRID 826 127. 3.175 0.
$
$ Loads and Constraints
$
SPCADD 2 1 4
LOAD 6 1. 1. 1
$
$ Parital listing of Displacement Constraints
$
SPC1 1 2 1
...
SPC1 4 345 817 THRU 826
$
$ Nodal Force
$
FORCE 1 394 0 10000. 0. 1. 0.
$
ENDDATA
Case Control
In order to perform a fatigue analysis, there must be a FATIGUE case control:
FATIGUE = 44
The ID referenced is ID 44. The analysis expects to find a FTGLOAD of ID=44 (or a FTGSEQ, but in
this case, since no FTGSEQ of ID 44 exists, then FTGLOAD of ID 44 must exist or a fatal error will
occur). The only other fatigue related bulk data entry that is absolutely required is MATFTG. Default
parameters and all elements associated with a fatigue material property are used by default if no FTGDEF
and/or FTGPARM entries are present.
See Material and Physical Properties (Ch. 3) in the MSC Nastran Fatigue Analysis Users Guide as they
are identical.
Fatigue Parameters
See Fatigue Parameters (Ch. 3) in the MSC Nastran Fatigue Analysis Users Guide as they are identical.
Cyclic Loading
The load applied in the FE model is a static load of 10,000 N. Fatigue analysis employs a pseudo-static
method where the cyclic variation of the static loading must be defined. As opposed to the previous
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
84
example using the keyhole model (Cyclic Loading (Ch. 3) in the MSC Nastran Fatigue Analysis Users
Guide), the time signal used in this analysis is rather long and complex, possibly random in nature, as
shown in Figure 4-1. Signals such as this one are typically some sort of measured load stored in an
external file.
The FATIGUE case control calls out FTGLOAD bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck defines
the cyclic load variation. A FTGLOAD entry is required in this example or an error will be issued.
$
$
$ -- --- ---- --- ----- ------ ----
FTGLOAD 44 18 1 10000. 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 18
./saetrn.dac
This FTGLOAD entry associates the FE stresses from SUBCASE 1 (LCID field 4 on FTGLOAD) and the
corresponding cyclic variation of that loading, thus defining the cyclic stress variation. A large TABLFTG
entry could have been used as in the previous example. However, the time variation for this example is
stored in an external DAC file called saetern.dac.
A DAC file is a standard binary file used to store measured load data. Various utilities (such as those
included with MSC Fatigue) exist to create, edit, and plot data from DAC files. Utilities also exist to
convert other types of files, such as RPC and CSV files, to DAC files. The FTGLOAD allows for
specification of a DAC file as opposed to using a TABLFTG. A DB flag in field 8 indicates that the TID
in field 3 refers to a UDNAME entry that lists the DAC file and its full or relative directory path. If no
directory path is given, the file is assumed to exist in the directory as the input file.
Load Normalizing, Scaling and Offsets
In the previous example we entered unity for the load magnitude (LDM field 5 on FTGLOAD) accepting
the FE load as being the true representation of the load and thus the stresses. The time history defined by
the TABLFTG entry scaled the stress distribution between 1 and -1 to signify the time variation of the
loading. This time the time history saetrn.dac is used to define the actual loading as it changes with time.
The FE load magnitude is therefore simply an arbitrary number used to obtain the stress distribution. The
stresses in the FE analysis need to be normalized by this FE load magnitude of 10000 N, to simulate the
stress distribution due to a unit load.
FTGLOAD 44 18 1 10000. 1.0 0.0 DB
The load magnitude acts as a divisor to normalize the stresses to obtain a stress distribution due to a unit
load as in the equation o
ij
(t)=P(t)o
ij
/P
fea
. Where o
ij
and P
fea
are the stress tensor and load magnitude,
respectively, from the FE analysis. P(t) is the externally defined time variation of the loading. And o
ij
(t)
is the resulting time variation of the stress tensor (at any particular location in the component). This can
be done because the analysis is linear elastic. Using linear elastic FE analysis and associating an external
time variation of the loading for fatigue analysis is called the pseudo-static method.
Main Index
85
CHAPTER 4
It might be said that all stress analyses are basically fatigue analyses, the differences
lying in the number of cycles of applied stress. - quote from Carl C. Osgood, Fatigue
Design (1982).
No fatigue equivalent units are defined for this problem. Thus the fatigue life will be reported back as
Repeats (of the time history load or the cyclic load variation).
Fatigue Results
Run the RFCount_v1.dat file using a supported version of MSC Nastran (> 2013) and ensure that the
saetrn.dac file is available in the same directory. Then inspect the rfcount.f06 file.
Listing 4-1 Fatigue Life and Damage for Nodes of Element 1
This analysis takes slightly longer to run to completion than the previous example due to the complex
nature of the time signal. The program is performing a procedure called Rainflow Cycle Counting,
sometimes referred to as preprocessing in a fatigue analysis. Cycle counting is a mechanism to extract
and count the number of stress cycles in a signal and must be done before damage can be determined and
summed due to each stress cycle.
ID ID ( REPEATS ) ( REPEATS ) DAMAGE STRESS STRESS FACTOR
1 1 Z1 0.1885E+06 5.275 0.1885E+06 5.275 0.5305E-05 -5.275 0.3328E+03 -0.1649E+03
3 Z1 0.1974E+06 5.295 0.1974E+06 5.295 0.5066E-05 -5.295 0.3299E+03 -0.1635E+03
23 Z1 0.1773E+07 6.249 0.1773E+07 6.249 0.5640E-06 -6.249 0.2165E+03 -0.1073E+03
21 Z1 0.1629E+07 6.212 0.1629E+07 6.212 0.6139E-06 -6.212 0.2198E+03 -0.1089E+03
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
86
Figure 4-2 Rainflow Cycle Counting Illustrated
The term Rainflow is attributed to two Japanese gentlemen, Matsuishi and Endo, who are credited with
defining the method. It is based on the concept of raindrops flowing off Japanese style pagoda roofs.
Time history signals are stood on end and rain is visualized to run off of each peak or valley. Various rules
were adopted to count cycles and reversals which is beyond the scope of this text; but suffice it to say
that the end result of rainflow cycle counting is a set of constant amplitude signals and a count of the
number of cycles of each. Cycle counts can be visualized as Probability Density Function (PDF) or as
three dimensional histogram matrices. The plot in Figure 4-3 shows the constant amplitude signals
determined from the cycle counting procedure broken up into various bins, each with its own stress range
and mean. The more discretized the bins are, the more accurate the damage calculation and summation
due to each bin. The damage histogram plots shows the amount of damage due to each bin of stress
cycles.
Main Index
87
CHAPTER 4
Figure 4-3 Cycle and Damage Histogram Plots
Damage Summation
It is important to break up a variable signal into a number of constant amplitude signals in order to assess
the life from the S-N curve. The curve itself is created by a series of constant amplitude tests. So for each
cycle in the signal you must look up the proper stress from the S-N curve. What stress to look up is the
job of rainflow cycle counting. The next challenge to tackle is the summation of the damage from each
cycle in order to report a total life due to all cycles. This is accomplished by way of the Palmgren-Miner
linear Damage Summation law.
This states that damage can be summed by determining the ratio of the number of cycles experienced to
the number of cycles to failure for a given stress range or level and then summing all the ratios for every
stress range. When this number, known as Miners Constant, reaches unity, failure is said to have
occurred. The predicted life is then determined by summing the percentage of life used by each stress
level for the entire time signal. Life is then reported back as to the number of times the given time signal
can be applied before failure.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
88
Figure 4-4 Palmgren-Miner Damage Summation Law
Speeding up the Analysis
There are two ways that you could speed up this analysis.
1. First, we already know where the failure location will be (at the point of highest stress). This is
because of the simplicity of this model and the fact that there is only a single load application point
and direction. Therefore, we could have defined only element one (1) in a SET1 entry specified
on the FTGDEF entry. This however, would only calculate life at this one element and would
ignore the rest of the model (see input deck RFCount_v2.dat).
SET1 21 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21
2. Second, using the RAINFLOW flag on the FTGPARM compresses the time history, thus
reducing unwanted cycles (or cycles that potentially cause little or no damage and can therefore
be eliminated from the analysis). For a single load event, a normal rainflow procedure is applied
to each requested location of the model once the stress time variation is determined. By
compressing the load time signal first, this speeds up the analysis significantly for a complex time
signal. It does however, produce slightly less accurate results in that some damaging cycles may
be eliminated, especially if there happen to a lot of them. Notice the slight variation in predicted
life when this is done (RFCount_v3.dat): 188,500 Repeats vs. 193,100 Repeats.
FTGPARM 44 SN
RAINFLOW LOAD 50.0
Hint: This is where user-defined fatigue equivalent units come in handy, because rarely does one
want life reported in Repeats of the time signal, but rather in more meaningful units such as
hours, miles, years, laps, missions, etc. This is accomplished by defining these user-defined
units on the FTGLOAD entry.
Main Index
89
CHAPTER 4
The above shows the RAINFLOW flag and indicates the method of time history compression
(LOAD) and that the load time history should be reduced by 50.0% of the maximum load range. If
the maximum load range is 10,000 N, then any cycles with less that 5,000 N are eliminated.
Effect of Mean Stress
Now let us investigate the effect of Mean stress on the fatigue life predictions. First remember that the
S-N curve we are using was produced for an R-ratio of minus one (-1), or, in other words, zero mean
stress. The time history used in this example has a predominately tensile mean. The initial life prediction
did not take into consideration this mean stress and therefore could perhaps be giving a somewhat non-
conservative answer. Various mean stress correction methods are available on the FTGPARM entry. Let
us investigate GOODMAN and GERBER. Note that both of them give more conservative answers (see input
deck RFCount_v4.dat).
FTGPARM 45 SN
STRESS ABSMAXPR GOODMAN NODE
and
FTGPARM 46 SN
STRESS ABSMAXPR GERBER NODE
How is mean stress compensated for in the S-N analysis?
The simple way to explain this is that for both the Goodman and Gerber methods, knowing the ultimate
tensile strength (S
u
) and the actual stress amplitude (o
a
) and mean (o
m
), an equivalent stress range with
zero mean is determined (S
e
). Goodman and Gerber follow these equations:
o
a
S
e
------
o
m
S
u
------- + 1 Goodman =
o
a
S
e
------
o
m
S
u
-------
\ .
| |
2
+ 1 Gerber =
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
90
Graphically this looks like the plot below where, at least for Goodman, if you draw a line connecting S
u

to the intersection of o
a
and o
m
and then continue it on to the stress amplitude axis, this will indicate the
equivalent stress S
e
with zero mean. This stress is then used to look up damage on the S-N curve.
Figure 4-5 Goodman & Gerber Mean Stress Correction
Probabilistic Nature of Fatigue
As a final exercise in this example, let us investigate two different materials. The material used thus far
is called MANTEN_MSN. Substitute the following RQC100_MSN into the input deck as such (see input
deck RFCount_v5.dat):
$
$ Material Records - for RQC100_MSN
$
MAT1 1 203403. 78231.7 .3 0. 0. 0. 0.
MATFTG 1 1.0
$ STATIC YS UTS CODE TYPE RR SE
STATIC 800.0 0.433
$ SN SRI1 b1 Nc1 b2 Nfc
SN 13240.0 -0.216 1.e8 0.0
The significant difference between the two materials is the SE field.
Note that RQC100_MSN, being a much higher strength steel, gives a much higher life prediction
(364,400 repeats vs. 188,500 repeats) for no mean stress corrections. This means RQC100_MSN is a
better material to use (or does it?). Just looking at the S-N curve might indicate this also.
Note: As a stress range of a cycle becomes larger and larger, there tends to be less and less possible
variability in the mean of that cycle. This is indicated on the cycle histogram plot since the
base of these type of plots tends to be triangular in nature, which means that as the stress gets
larger, the mean stress has less of an effect on the fatigue life.
Main Index
91
CHAPTER 4
On the FTGPARM entry change the design criterion or certainty of survival (SURV field on CERNTY
line) to 99% and rerun the analysis, once using MANTEN_MSN and again using RQC100_MSN.
FTGPARM 44 SN
$ CERTNTY SURV
CERTNTY 99.0
Note the life of approximately 87,400 repeats versus 31,700 repeats, less than that of the lower strength
steel. This is due to the probabilistic nature of fatigue and the scatter associated with the S-N curves
themselves. By specifying 99% as the design criterion, we are asking to calculate a life value based on a
99% certainty of survival. The larger the scatter in the original S-N data that makes up the curve, the less
certain we will be of survival and the code takes this into account by reporting a more conservative
answer. The default is a 50% probability of survival (or failure).
.
Table 4-2 Mean Stress Correction Results
Other mean stress correction methods can be employed using the multi-curve method as explained in the
previous Chapter. (See input files RFCount_v6.dat through RFCount_v10.dat.)
Note: Scatter is associated with S-N curves and other damage curves due to the fact that, for
example, if you take 10 identical test coupons and subject them to what you think are identical
tests, you will get ten slightly different answers. The material parameters associated with S-N
curves take this into consideration with the Standard Error of Log(N) (SE) determined by
regression analysis of the raw data.
Mean Stress Correction (50% Certainty of Survival)
None Goodman Gerber
MANTEN_MSN 188,500 (Repeats) 85,900 (Repeats) 169,800 (Repeats)
RQC100_MSN 364,400 (Repeats) 216,200 (Repeats) 344,900 (Repeats)
Mean Stress Correction (99% Certainty of Survival)
None Goodman Gerber
MANTEN_MSN 87,400 (Repeats) 39,600 (Repeats) 78,700 (Repeats)
RQC100_MSN 31,700 (Repeats) 18,400 (Repeats) 29,900 (Repeats)
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
92
Concluding Remarks
This exercise introduced you to Rainflow Cycle Counting, Damage Summation, Mean stress effects,
and the probabilistic nature of fatigue by using a randomly varying load on our simple keyhole model.
Though this example still did not help us identify critical locations since we already knew where failure
would occur, it did start to show the power of MSC Nastran Embedded Fatigue analysis by being able to
handle complex time signals and to make compensation for parameters that may effect the fatigue life,
something that would be a daunting task to do by hand.
The fatigue analysis does not take into account the frequency (speed at which cycles are experienced) or
the sequence (when a particular cycle is experienced relative to other cycles) of cycles from a given
signal. Rainflow cycle counting simply counts the number of cycles and determines their range and
mean. Frequency and sequence can have an influence on the fatigue life but is a third or fourth order
effect on life prediction in most cases.
Factor of Safety Analysis
Sometimes fatigue analyses report back infinite life as the results. Infinite life does not tell us much
though. For this reason a Factor of Safety analysis can be run by setting the options on the FTGPARM
entry as follows (see input deck RFCount_v11.dat).
FTGPARM 44 SN
FOS LIFE 188500. 0.1 20.0
The FOS flag indicates a factor of safety analysis. The supported option is that based on fatigue LIFE.
A life-based calculation is an iterative calculation used to find the magnitude of the scaling factor on the
stress-time spectrum that will cause failure for the specified design life. The scaling factor is applied to
all cycles and is, thus, an overall factor of safety suited well for random loading.
Just for illustration purposes, the target life in this example is the lowest life calculated at node 1 of this
model (188500 Repeats). The maximum factor to calculate is 20.0. This is set so that anything above
20 is reported as 20, which helps speed up the analysis by moving on to the next entity. The accuracy of
the back calculation is set to 0.1 so that when a scale factor has been determined such that the fatigue
life is with 0.1% of the design life, the analysis completes and moves on to the next entity. It is actually
best to set this 1.0 (1%) to speed up the iterative process. Thus for this model, it is expected that the scale
factor determined at Node 1 would be 1.0 and >1.0 at all other nodes because our design life should be
exactly reached at Node 1.
When you expect a component to survive a very large number of significant loading cycles, e.g., around
10
8
cycles or more, it is not reasonable to make finite life predictions; you are too near to the fatigue limit
where the amount of scatter is very large. For cases like this it makes more sense to apply a Factor of
Safety method which aims to put the design below the fatigue limit by a selected safety margin. The life-
based method requires the target Design Life, a Back Calculation Accuracy factor, and a Maximum
Factor to be set. The Maximum Factor is simply used to stop the analysis for any particular location when
this maximum is reached and go on to the next location. This can speed up the analysis if lowered
significantly. The life-based method is iterative. The calculation stops when the life is within a certain
percentage of the target life based on the Back Calculation Accuracy set.
Main Index
93
CHAPTER 4
Patran Setup
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it RFCount. Use the Analysis application to
import the first input deck associated with this example: RFCount_v1.dat. (Action=Read Input
File) Make sure the Analysis Preference is set to MSC.Nastran.
Go to the Loads/BCs application. Plot the LBC markers (Action=Plot Markers). Make sure the
Current Load Case is the imported load case (Untitled.SC1). Select all the LBCs and press the
Apply button. You should see the constraints and 10,000 N load.
Go to the Materials application. Set the Action to Modify and select mat1.1. Note the values in
the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If there is no current Stress-Life (SN) constitutive model,
create one. If there is, verify the following parameters, which are written to the MATFTG entry:
Go to the Element Properties application. Set the Action to Modify. Select the property pshell.1.
Note the properties defined here. Fatigue properties can be defined here but are not. Thus all
defaults are used for this example, so there is no need to modify anything. Values for the fatigue
properties, if defined, are placed on the PFTG entry. All other pertinent properties are part of the
PSHELL entry and related elements for this model.
Parameter Value
Options: Standard Parameters
Group: None
Type: None
Ultimate Tensile Strength 600.0
Stress Range Intercept 8948.0
Transition Point 2.0E8
Main Index
Patran Setup
94
RFCount_v1.dat, a job by the name of RFCount_v1 has been created. Click on it to restore all its
below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done using the OK buttons.
loading in this example, we want to define a single load event (Event: 1) that associates our 10,000
N subcase called Untitled.SC1 to the load variation defined by an external DAC file
representation. This saetrn.dac file should be located in your working directory.
Parameter Value
Stress Units: MPa
Results Loc.: Node
Main Index
95
CHAPTER 4
Click on the cell under the Time History column, if necessary, and select the Time History (.dac)
file from the appropriate list box. The cell just needs to be selected and active to make selection.
Enter 10,000 for the Load Magnitude. Make sure you press the Enter or Return key to accept the
value into the selected cell. The single load event is now defined.
mouse button click on the new sequence and Add Event. Select the one and only event from the
list box that appears and press Apply.
Note that you can view the time history by using the Time History Manager button. This
launches a utility to view and manage these DAC files. To use this utility, the DAC file must first
be loaded into its database. Then you can graphically view it. The operation of this utility is fairly
easy and intuitive. Patran operation will be suspended until you exit from the utility.
Data on this form defines the FTGSEQ/FTGEVNT/FTGLOAD/UDNAME entries. The load
sequence is now defined. You can close this form using the OK button.
Press the Apply button on the Analysis application form to submit the job.
Method=Result Entities. Select the rfcount_v1.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Repeats.
Or you can define new jobs in the same database by selecting the existing job RFCount_v1 and then
for each:
RFCount_v1.dat Baseline - no modifications necessary
RFCount_v2.dat First create a group with all but Element 1 in it. When setting up
output requests under the Subcases... form, select only that group in
the Output Requests... form as the exclusion set in the Select
Elements to Exclude list box.
Main Index
Patran Setup
96
RFCount_v3.dat When setting up the Fatigue Parameters..., turn ON the Time
History Compression and set Method to Load Percentage and set the
Gate to 50%.
RFCount_v4.dat For these you will set the Mean Stress Correction on the Fatigue
Parameters... form to the appropriate value (Goodman or Gerber).
Also the Certainty of Survival is set appropriately at 50% or 99%.
RFCount_v5.dat This is identical to RFCount_v4.dat where the Mean Stress
Correction and Certainty of Survival is set appropriately, but the
standard S-N parameters for material RQC100 are used.
RFCount_v6.dat These are all set up in an identical manner to that done in Chapter 3:
A Simple S-N Analysis by changing the Stress-Life (S-N) and Elastic
constitutive models under the Materials application and rerunning
the analysis.
Mean Stress Correction is set to Interpolation. Interpolation Limit is
set to Use Max Curve for all but RFCount_v7.dat, which uses
Extrapolation.
RFCount_v7.dat
RFCount_v8.dat
RFCount_v9.dat
RFCount_v10.dat Uses the Bastenaire S-N model identically to that done in Chapter 3:
A Simple S-N Analysis.
RFCount_v11.dat On the Fatigue Parameters... form, turn ON the Factor of Safety
analysis and set the Design Life to 188,500 Repeats, the Back
Calculation Accuracy to 0.1 and the Maximum Safety Factor to 20.
Main Index
Chapter 5: A Simple e-N Analysis
5
A Simple c-N Analysis
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Concluding Remarks
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
98
Problem Description
A model, as shown below, aptly named the spider model because of its unique shape, is fixed at the shafts
of its three legs. The center shaft is subject to a fully reversed 15 KSI amplitude pressure loading on its
underside that oscillates in a sinusoidal fashion. A linear static analysis is performed using SOL 101.
Figure 5-1 Spider Model
Everything that you have learned thus far using the Total Life method is now also applicable to the next
method of fatigue life prediction. We will build on this knowledge to introduce and explain the Crack
Initiation method, sometimes known as the Local Strain method, or Strain-Life (e-N) method. As the
name implies, the Failure Criterion is life to initiate a crack. Once an engineering crack appears, failure
is said to have occurred.
Objective
To introduce the Crack Initiation method.
To understand Cyclic Softening and Cyclic Hardening.
To learn how cyclic stress-strain and strain-life curves are created.
To understand how plasticity is accounted for.
To relate stress-life to strain-life prediction methods.
To emphasize the issue with consistent model units and fatigue analysis.
Main Index
99
CHAPTER 5
A Simple e-N Analysis
Files Required
spiderCI_v1.dat Original input file - entire model - UDNAME
spiderCI_v2.dat Only element of interest included in analysis - TABLFTG
spiderCI_v3.dat Derived material properties - XELSET
spiderCI_v4.dat STRAIN flag used instead of STRESS on FTGPARM
sine01.dac Cyclic loading definition file
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
100
Fatigue Setup
A partial listing of the input deck for this model is shown here. Explanations of each portion related to
fatigue analysis follows (see file spiderCI_v1.dat).
$
$ Spider Model (Simple e-N Analysis)
$
SOL 101
CEND
$
TITLE = Spider Model (Simple e-N Analysis)
$
FATIGUE = 44
$
SUBCASE 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
$
BEGIN BULK
$
PARAM POST 0
PARAM PRTMAXIM YES
$
$ Fatigue Element Definitions
$
SET4 1 PROP PSOLID 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 1 18
PFTG 18 POLISH
$
$ Fatigue Parameters + Model Stress Units
$
FTGPARM 44 EN
DTI UNITS 1 PSI
$
$
FTGSEQ 44
33 1.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
FTGEVNT 33 22
FTGLOAD 22 99 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 99
./sine01.dac
$
$ Partial Listing of Elements and Element Properties:
$
PSOLID 1 1 0
CHEXA ... etc.
$
Main Index
101
CHAPTER 5
$ Material Record : BS4360-50D
$
MAT1 1 2.77602+7 .3
MATFTG 1 145.0377
STATIC 480.0
EN 1036.0 -0.123 -0.618 0.622 0.163 912.0 2.0E6
0.0 0.0 0.0
$
$ Partial Listing of Multipoint Constraints:
$
RBE2 1 10001 123 265 266 267 268 2255
2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 3309 3310 3311
3312 3313 3314
etc.
$
$ Partial Listing of Nodes:
$
GRID ... etc.
$
$ Loads for Load Case : Default
$
SPCADD 2 1
LOAD 2 1. 1. 1
$
$ Displacement Constraints: Fixed
$
SPC1 1 123 10001 10002 10003 10004 10005 10006
$
$ Parial Listing of Pressure Load: 15ksi
$
PLOAD4 ... etc.
$
$ Referenced Coordinate Frames:
$
CORD2C ... etc.
ENDDATA
Case Control
A FATIGUE case control is required to request fatigue life output.
FATIGUE = 44
A FTGSEQ or a FTGLOAD entry with ID 44 is required in the deck. A MATFTG entry defining strain-
based fatigue material parameters is also required and elements associated to this MATFTG must be
defined on a FTGDEF entry of ID 44. If no FTGDEF entry is present, all elements with fatigue material
properties are included in the fatigue life calculation. A FTGPARM entry of ID 44 is also required in this
case since the analysis is meant to be a strain based (c-N) solution. If this entry is not present, then an S-
N (stress based) fatigue analysis is initiated and a fatal error will be issued since no S-N data is present.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
102
The FATIGUE case control calls out FTGDEF bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck defines
where on the model, or that is, which elements of the model, are to be included in the fatigue analysis.
The FTGDEF entry uses an ELSET flag to indicate that pairs of element sets and their corresponding
fatigue properties are to be defined. In this case only one pair is defined. That pair references a SET4
entry of ID 1 that defines all elements of element property PSOLID of ID 1. It associates these elements
defined by the SET4 entry to the physical fatigue properties defined by PFTG entry of ID 18.
$
$
SET4 1 PROP PSOLID 1
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 1 18
PFTG 18 POLISH
Please note that since the entire model is included in the elements defined by the SET4 entry, it was not
actually necessary to define the element set as shown above. The same thing can be accomplished with
just these entries and by default all elements of the model are part of the fatigue analysis:
FTGDEF 44 18
PFTG 18 POLISH
The only physical fatigue property defined is that of a polished surface finish (POLISH). The PFTG entry
is required in order to define a surface finish, although POLISH is the default, which is the same thing as
specifying NONE.
Strain based fatigue material properties are required for a local strain fatigue analysis. The concept is
similar to the way stress-based fatigue analysis is performed and life calculated by looking up stress on
a stress vs. life plot. In this case strain is looked up on a strain vs. life plot. However, the stresses are first
converted to strains, if necessary, and then the final lookup strain value is modified to account for
plasticity and mean strain as requested on the FTGPARM entry.
$
$ Material Record : BS4360-50D
$
MAT1 1 2.77602+7 .3
MATFTG 1 145.0377
STATIC 480.0
EN 1036.0 -0.123 -0.618 0.622 0.163 912.0 2.0E6
0.0 0.0 0.0
The material used in this example is called BS4360-50D. Youngs Modulus is defined on a MAT1 entry
and a corresponding MATFTG entry of the same ID as the MAT1 is required to associate the fatigue
material properties to the elements.
Model Units
Note that Youngs Modulus entered on the MAT1 entry is in stress units of PSI, consistent with the
models consistent units (length in inches and force in pounds). The stress parameters entered on the
Main Index
103
CHAPTER 5
MATFTG entry are entered in SI units of MPa in this example, thus the CNVRT field on the MATFTG is
necessary to convert the values to PSI to be consistent with the rest of the model.
In addition to this, fatigue analysis requires that the models stress units be identified. This is done on the
DTI,UNITS bulk data:
DTI UNITS 1 PSI
Internally, the stresses are converted to SI units of MPa as are all the stress parameters entered on the
MATFTG entry (and Youngs Modulus on the MAT1).
Cyclic Stress-Strain Curves
Stress based (S-N) life plots consist of a single plot known as the stress-life curve. For strain-based
fatigue analysis, the fatigue material properties actually define two different plots. The first is the cyclic
stress-strain plot to relate stress to strain (see glossary term Cyclic Properties). When stresses are used,
they are first converted to strains using the cyclic stress-strain data. Cyclic stress-strain curves must be
used as opposed to monotonic stress-strain curves (see glossary term Monotonic Properties) because of
possible strain hardening or softening due to the cyclic nature of fatigue. The second plot is the actual
strain-life plot that relates the cyclic strain to fatigue life.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
104
Figure 5-2 Cyclic Stress-Strain Plots of MANTEN and RQC100
The plot above show how two materials behave under cyclic loading conditions. It also shows how they
behave relative to one another. RQC100 is obviously a much higher strength steel with its yield point well
above that of MANTEN.
Three parameters (E, K, n) need to be defined in order to characterize these plots according to the
following equation that relates stress amplitude to strain amplitude:
The first part of the right hand side can be recognized as the elastic stress-strain equation (Hookes law)
and the second part defines the plastic strain.
This equation is identical to the Ramberg-Osgood equation that relates total strain to the elastic strain
plus plastic strain in the Monotonic Properties sense. The only differences are the primes () on K and
n to signify that it represents a cyclic condition as opposed to a monotonic condition.
c
a
o
a
E
------
o
a
K'
------
\ .
| |
1 n'
+ =
Main Index
105
CHAPTER 5
Cycle Hardening, Cycle Softening
Now an interesting thing to do is to examine the detailed material property values for each of the two
materials shown above in Figure 5-2.
Figure 5-3 Cyclic Material Properties of MANTEN and RQC100
Note the Work Hardening Exponent for each of the materials:
1. The RQC100's value is relatively small.
This implies it is weaker under cyclic conditions. This is known as cyclic softening or strain
softening.
2. The MANTEN's work hardening exponent is relative large.
This implies that it is stronger under cyclic loading. This is known as cyclic hardening or strain
hardening.
When a material softens under cyclic loading, this can be very bad from a durability standpoint. This is
why many structures or components fail prematurely even though, supposedly, they have been designed
to remain below yield. Compare the work hardening exponent (n) to the cyclic strain-hardening exponent
(n) to note the hardening (n>n) or softening (n<n) characteristics of a material.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
106
The problem in these softening cases is that the actual yield point is much lower when subject to cyclic
loading.
Figure 5-4 Cyclic Hardening and Softening
Cyclic Material Tests
How are these cyclic stress-strain curves created?
The monotonic stress-strain curve is created by simply placing a test coupon in a servo-hydraulic test
machine and slowly increasing the load until the component breaks. The elastic modulus can be
determined from this test as well as the yield and ultimate tensile strengths.
A cyclic stress-strain curve is created through a series of tests where the strain level is precisely
controlled. The load is increased until the specified strain level is reached and then the load is reversed.
These tests are typically performed using fully reversed loading (R-Ratio = -1). Each test is done at a
different strain level. Initially each test will exhibit a softening or hardening effect as can be seen if the
hysteresis loops are plotted for a given test (see diagram above). Eventually the material will stabilize
and stop hardening or softening. This stable hysteresis loop is then extracted.
Main Index
107
CHAPTER 5
The maximum stress/strain level from the stable hysteresis loop of each test is then cross-plotted onto its
own stress-strain space which then constitutes the cyclic stress-strain curve.
Figure 5-5 Stable Hysteresis Loops
Strain-Life Curve
From each of these strain-controlled tests also comes another piece of information: the number of cycles
to failure. This information can be plotted onto its own curve called the Strain-Life (e-N) curve.
Figure 5-6 Strain-Life Curves of MANTEN and RQC100
You can compare the two strain-life plots for MANTEN and RQC100. Note that they cross each other
and therefore exhibit different life behavior depending on the stain level experienced. So it is impossible
to say from the plot which would perform better.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
108

Below is a depiction of the strain-life curve for the actual material used in this example problem
(BS4360-50D). Note that there are three lines plotted. The actual strain-life curve is made up of two
components: an elastic portion and a plastic portion.
Figure 5-7 Strain-Life Curve of BS4360-50D with E-P Lines
This curve can be fully characterized by knowing four material parameters as shown in the equation of
the strain-life plot (o
f
,b,c
f
,c):
Like the stress-strain curves, it also is broken into an elastic component and a plastic component. The
summation of the two lines makes the total strain-life curve. The following notes are made about this plot:
1. The elastic and plastic lines cross each other at some point which is called the transition point.
Note: The Failure Criterion (that is, when a crack has actually initiated) is determined by ASTM
standard E606. It is not a specified length of the crack, but instead a percentage drop in load
as measured by the test device. When a crack initiates the component can no longer sustain the
same level of stress for the same strain rate. If you actually looked at a test specimen after
reaching the failure point, there would appear to be an engineering sized crack of, say, 1 to 2
mm in length.
Ac
2
------
o
f
'
E
------ 2N
f
( )
b
c
f
' 2N
f
( )
c
+ =
(Elastic) (Plastic)
Main Index
109
CHAPTER 5
2. The transition point defines the difference between High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) versus Low Cycle
Fatigue (LCF).
3. To the right of the transition point is considered HCF because elastic events dominate plastic
events.
4. To the left of the transition point is considered LCF because plastic events dominate elastic
events.
Why is this important?
The type of fatigue being experienced will dictate the remedy or solution. For example, in HCF you
might try a higher strength steel, or change the surface finish/treatment or mean stress (residual) to better
the fatigue life. If LCF is being experienced these remedies would have little or no effect and in some
cases, perhaps even worsen the situation. The solution there is to find a material that is more resistant to
plastic deformation, such as a more ductile material.
The Concept of Similitude
Just as with the S-N method, an c-N curve is also based on the principle of similitude. This means that
if we can reproduce the same local strain as that experienced in, say, the plate with a hole shown to the
right, in a test laboratory specimen made of the same material, then we can expect the life of the two to
be about the same, when subjected to the same strain levels.
Stress-Life vs. Strain-Life
Take a good look at the elastic portion of the strain-life equation above. If you ignore the plastic
component and take E to the other side of the equation you get a stress equaling some constant times the
number of cycles to failure raised to the power b. This is the exact formula for the stress-life curve. So
the elastic strain-life curve is, in fact, a material S-N curve (with crack initiation as the failure criterion).
The significance is that the S-N method is nothing more that a subset of the Crack Initiation method
ignoring plastic influences.
Note: The crack initiation method, taking into account elastic and plastic contributions to fatigue
life, is more widely applicable to a greater range of problems (HCF and LCF) whereas the
Total Life method breaks down below the transition point (usually around 10
5
cycles) because
plasticity dominates. This is why S-N curves are only good for HCF.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
110
Deriving Materials Properties
As a side note, what if you do not have access to specific fatigue material properties yet you still want to
do a fatigue analysis?
By using the MATFTG entry with only the STATIC line, the UTS, and a material code, appropriate cyclic
material properties (an c-N curve in this case) are derived automatically (see input deck spiderCI_v3.dat).
MAT1 1 1.732+7 .3
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 480.0 99
See the description of MATFTG for a list of valid material type codes.
The referenced input deck also shows how to specify the elements of interest based on an exclusion set
definition.
SET1 2 1 THRU 1781 1784 THRU 2015 2018
THRU 2249 2252 THRU 2481
FTGDEF 44 100.0 18
XELSET 2
PFTG 18 POLISH
Because no ELSET line exists in the FTGDEF, all elements are selected by default. However, because of
the existence of the XELSET flag, the elements listed on SET1 of ID 2 are excluded from the analysis.
Main Index
111
CHAPTER 5
Fatigue Parameters
The FATIGUE case control also calls out FTGPARM bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck
defines various fatigue analysis parameters. For this example, the FTGPARM entry is required and must
define the analysis to be strain-life (EN) in the TYPE field (3). All other fields use defaults or are left
blank.
$
$
FTGPARM 44 EN 1.0
For this example, this same entry could have been included with all the defaults as:
$
$
FTGPARM 44 EN 1.0
CERTNTY 50.0
These are shown here to emphasize a few things that occur during the analysis.
1. First the STRESS flag indicates that stresses are to be used in the fatigue analysis. The
STRAIN flag could have also been used. Stress are converted to strains in a crack initiation
analysis. Both STRESS and STRAIN flags cannot be specified. Only one is allowed.
2. Second is the 6th field on the STRESS line that is set to NODE. This specifies that the fatigue
analysis should be performed at all the nodes of each element defined by the FTGDEF entry.
3. Third is the stress (or strain) combination to be used in the fatigue analysis. This is specified in
the STRESS or STRAIN line. The ABSMAXPR in the 3rd field of this line is the scalar
Stress Combination and corresponds to the absolute maximum principal value. This is the
parameter that is calculated from the stress or strain tensor before the plasticity correction and
damage lookup and summation is done. The tensor from the FE analysis results is extracted at
each elements node. However only a single value can be looked up on the o-c and c-N curves.
So the six component values of the tensor are resolved to the maximum absolute principal value
which is used as the look up parameter.
4. Fourth is the Mean Stress Correction to take place. In this case no mean stress correction (NONE)
is to take place.
5. Fifth is the Certainty of Survival set on the line with the CRTNTY flag. It is set to 50.0% by
default. This uses the scatter in the material property data to adjust the fatigue life prediction
accordingly. A higher certainty will produce a lower life prediction and vice versa. Thus a value
of 50.0 means that there is a 50% probability that the reported life will be reached. A value of
95.0 means that a 95% chance of reaching the reported life.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
112
Cyclic Loading
The load applied in the FE model is a static load of 15 KSI or 15,000 PSI. Fatigue analysis employs a
pseudo-static method where the cyclic variation of the static loading must be defined. The time signal
used in this analysis is a fully reversed loading. Cyclic loading is sometimes described using a parameter
called the R-Ratio (R), which is the minimum load divided by the maximum load. R is a measure of the
mean stress or defines the constant mean of a signal. R = -1 for a fully reversed loading.
The o-c and c-N curves used in this example were generated by testing numerous polished test specimens
at different constant amplitude, fully reversed (R= -1) loading conditions. The parameter or power law
that defines these curves was determined by Regression Analysis, of the raw data. Therefore no Mean
Stress Correction is required since there is no mean stress to speak of (the mean stress is zero). This is
why NONE is specified as the correction method on the FTGPARM entry.
Now, in order to do a fatigue analysis using linear static FE results, we must define how the load varies
with time. This is easily done using the bulk data entries FTGSEQ, FTGEVNT, FTGLOAD, and
TABLFTG. The load is a unit sine wave. Thus the loading oscillates between 15 KSI and -15 KSI.
A single occurrence of this fully reversed, constant amplitude sine wave is defined as one cycle of the
loading (for more information please visit Cycles (cycle counting). The X points are taken as evenly
spaced intervals (see Sample Rate).
Figure 5-8 Display of Unit Sine Wave, Fully Reversed Load
The FATIGUE case control also calls out FTGSEQ bulk data of ID 44. This portion of the input deck
defines the cyclic load variation. A FTGSEQ entry is required or an error will be issued (see exception
below).
$
$
FTGSEQ 44
Main Index
113
CHAPTER 5
33 1.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
FTGEVNT 33 22
FTGLOAD 22 99 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 99
./sine01.dac
A FTGSEQ entry defines a sequence of load events. A FTGEVNT entry groups different cyclic loads into
a single event (simultaneously acting loads). A FTGLOAD entry defines the relationship between the FE
stresses from a particular SOL 101 subcase and the corresponding cyclic variation of the stresses due to
the loading from that subcase. The UDNAME entry defines the actual cyclic load variation via an external
file.
More will be elaborated on FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT as the loading become more complicated in
subsequent examples. For now, suffice it to say that there is only one load in the event and only one event
in the load sequence. So for all intense purposes, the input could be simplified to reference only the
FTGLOAD entry as such (see file spiderCI_v2.dat):
$ -- --- ---- --- ----- ------ ----
FTGLOAD 44 99 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
UDNAME 99
./sine01.dac
The cyclic load variation is defined in the external file called sine01.dac. This file, defined on the
UDNAME, is a representation of a sine wave defined by multiple points. As explained in the previous
example on Cycles (cycle counting), the rainflow procedure will only find one cycle in this signal of unit
amplitude and zero mean. So, it is the same as defining a signal that just has four points in it as used in
the Simple SN, our first example. Thus this portion of the input deck is really equivalent to:
FTGLOAD 44 99 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
UNITS 1.0 Cycles
TABLFTG 99
0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 ENDT
The above simplifications shows that the FATIGUE case control calls out the FTGLOAD entry instead of
the FTGSEQ. This is the one exception where a FTGSEQ entry is not required, if replaced by a single
FTGLOAD entry. Only a single load (one subcase) is possible in this case.
The FTGLOAD entry associates the actual cyclic variation of the stresses/strains from a particular
subcase to the subcase itself. The TID field 3 points to the TABLFTG or UDNAME entry and the LCID
field 4 points to the SUBCASE ID. The other three fields are for normalizing, scaling, and offsetting the
stresses. In this case, no additional normalization, scaling or offsetting is done as explained in the
previous two examples.
As also explained in the previous two examples, the second line of the FTGSEQ entry (or the FTGLOAD
entry) has a flag called UNITS set for defining the fatigue equivalent units, Cycles in this example.
Life will be reported back in both Cycles and Repeats of the cyclic load definition.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
114
Fatigue Results
Run the spiderCI_v1.dat file using a supported version of MSC Nastran (>2013). Then inspect the
spiderci_v1.f06 file. Only the element nodes of interest are listed here. The highest damage (lowest life)
occurs on or near nodes 981, 2314, and 3650.
ELEMENT GRID LAYER LIFE LOG LIFE LIFE LOG LIFE DAMAGE LOG MAXIMUM MINIMUM SAFETY
ID ID ( REPEATS ) (CYCLES ) DAMAGE STRESS STRESS FACTOR
1782 980 0.1126E+05 4.052 0.1126E+05 4.052 0.8881E-04 -4.052 0.4430E+05 -0.4430E+05
981 0.9806E+04 3.991 0.9806E+04 3.991 0.1020E-03 -3.991 0.4484E+05 -0.4484E+05
987 0.4609E+07 6.664 0.4609E+07 6.664 0.2169E-06 -6.664 0.2600E+05 -0.2600E+05
986 0.4786E+07 6.680 0.4786E+07 6.680 0.2089E-06 -6.680 0.2591E+05 -0.2591E+05
997 0.4377E+05 4.641 0.4377E+05 4.641 0.2285E-04 -4.641 0.3931E+05 -0.3931E+05
998 0.3749E+05 4.574 0.3749E+05 4.574 0.2667E-04 -4.574 0.3985E+05 -0.3985E+05
1005 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1651E+05 -0.1651E+05
1004 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1695E+05 -0.1695E+05
1783 981 0.3887E+04 3.590 0.3887E+04 3.590 0.2572E-03 -3.590 0.4863E+05 -0.4863E+05
982 0.4160E+04 3.619 0.4160E+04 3.619 0.2404E-03 -3.619 0.4834E+05 -0.4834E+05
988 0.2682E+08 7.428 0.2682E+08 7.428 0.3728E-07 -7.429 0.2225E+05 -0.2225E+05
987 0.3201E+08 7.505 0.3201E+08 7.505 0.3124E-07 -7.505 0.2191E+05 -0.2191E+05
998 0.7644E+04 3.883 0.7644E+04 3.883 0.1308E-03 -3.883 0.4583E+05 -0.4583E+05
999 0.8523E+04 3.931 0.8523E+04 3.931 0.1173E-03 -3.931 0.4539E+05 -0.4539E+05
1006 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1853E+05 -0.1853E+05
1005 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1850E+05 -0.1850E+05
2016 2313 0.4160E+04 3.619 0.4160E+04 3.619 0.2404E-03 -3.619 0.4834E+05 -0.4834E+05
2314 0.3888E+04 3.590 0.3888E+04 3.590 0.2572E-03 -3.590 0.4863E+05 -0.4863E+05
2319 0.3203E+08 7.506 0.3203E+08 7.506 0.3122E-07 -7.506 0.2191E+05 -0.2191E+05
2318 0.2685E+08 7.429 0.2685E+08 7.429 0.3725E-07 -7.429 0.2225E+05 -0.2225E+05
2329 0.8523E+04 3.931 0.8523E+04 3.931 0.1173E-03 -3.931 0.4539E+05 -0.4539E+05
2330 0.7644E+04 3.883 0.7644E+04 3.883 0.1308E-03 -3.883 0.4583E+05 -0.4583E+05
2335 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1850E+05 -0.1850E+05
2334 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1854E+05 -0.1854E+05
2017 2314 0.9805E+04 3.991 0.9805E+04 3.991 0.1020E-03 -3.991 0.4484E+05 -0.4484E+05
2315 0.1126E+05 4.052 0.1126E+05 4.052 0.8882E-04 -4.051 0.4430E+05 -0.4430E+05
2320 0.4789E+07 6.680 0.4789E+07 6.680 0.2088E-06 -6.680 0.2591E+05 -0.2591E+05
2319 0.4611E+07 6.664 0.4611E+07 6.664 0.2169E-06 -6.664 0.2600E+05 -0.2600E+05
2330 0.3748E+05 4.574 0.3748E+05 4.574 0.2668E-04 -4.574 0.3985E+05 -0.3985E+05
2331 0.4376E+05 4.641 0.4376E+05 4.641 0.2285E-04 -4.641 0.3931E+05 -0.3931E+05
2336 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1695E+05 -0.1695E+05
2335 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1651E+05 -0.1651E+05
2250 3649 0.4851E+06 5.686 0.4851E+06 5.686 0.2062E-05 -5.686 0.3176E+05 -0.3176E+05
3650 0.1262E+07 6.101 0.1262E+07 6.101 0.7927E-06 -6.101 0.2917E+05 -0.2917E+05
3656 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1245E+05 -0.1245E+05
3655 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1249E+05 -0.1249E+05
3666 0.4348E+07 6.638 0.4348E+07 6.638 0.2300E-06 -6.638 0.2613E+05 -0.2613E+05
3667 0.4534E+07 6.656 0.4534E+07 6.656 0.2205E-06 -6.657 0.2603E+05 -0.2603E+05
3674 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.9046E+04 -0.9046E+04
3673 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.9988E+04 -0.9988E+04
2251 3650 0.1261E+07 6.101 0.1261E+07 6.101 0.7928E-06 -6.101 0.2917E+05 -0.2917E+05
3651 0.4851E+06 5.686 0.4851E+06 5.686 0.2061E-05 -5.686 0.3176E+05 -0.3176E+05
3657 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1249E+05 -0.1249E+05
3656 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.1245E+05 -0.1245E+05
3667 0.4534E+07 6.656 0.4534E+07 6.656 0.2205E-06 -6.657 0.2603E+05 -0.2603E+05
3668 0.4347E+07 6.638 0.4347E+07 6.638 0.2300E-06 -6.638 0.2613E+05 -0.2613E+05
3675 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.9989E+04 -0.9989E+04
3674 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.1000E+31 30.000 0.0000E+00 -20.000 0.9046E+04 -0.9046E+04
Main Index
115
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5-9 RainFlow Cycle Counting
When the analysis starts it first converts stresses to strains if stresses have been supplied. The rainflow
counting procedure then takes place as discussed in the last chapter (of course only one cycle is found
with this simple sine wave). This results in a matrix of strain cycles with their respective ranges and
means. The Crack Initiation method helps to perhaps, better understand rainflow cycle counting.
The reason rainflow cycle counting works so well is because it actually counts the number of stress-strain
cycles (hysteresis loops) in a cyclic or time varying signal. So consider a signal stood on its end. As it is
loaded from point A to B and unloaded from point B to point C, this converts into the section A-B-C in
stress-strain space. On loading from point C to D, in stress-strain space, it actually remembers it was on
the original path from A to D and the interruption B-C-B is counted as one cycle. E-F-E also counts as
a cycle as does G-H-G. All cycles fall inside of one large, outer cycle (A-D-A) representing the maximum
and minimum of the signal. Cycles with some noticeable area inside within this large, outer loop cause
damage while those that are straight lines are purely elastic and cause no damage.
Elastic-Plastic Correction
Now before damage can be determined and summed for each cycle, certain corrections need to take
place, the main correction being the conversion of purely elastic stresses and strains to elastic-plastic
stresses and strains.
Plasticity is accounted for in the Crack Initiation method by the Neuber method. The elastic stresses and
strains are looked up on the elastic line and then corrected to fall onto the cyclic stress strain curve to
determine the elastic-plastic stresses and strains. This elastic-plastic strain is used to look up damage on
the strain-life damage curve.
Neubers Elastic-plastic Correction, sometimes called a Notch Correction, is based on the simple
principle that the product of the elastic stress and strain should be equal to the product of the elastic-
plastic stress and strain from the cyclic stress-strain curve.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
116
Then through an iterative method, the elastic-plastic stress and strain can be determined. This is
illustrated below:
Figure 5-10 Neubers Elastic-Plastic Correction
Effect of Mean Stress
Just as with the S-N method, various mean stress correction methods are available. These are the Smith-
Watson-Topper and Morrow methods. First remember that the material data we are using were produced
for an R-ratio of minus one (-1), or, in other words, zero mean stress. The time history used in this
example has a zero mean. So we would not expect that using any mean stress correction would make
much difference. You can change the FTGPARM options to verify this claim.
FTGPARM 44 EN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPR SWT NEUBER NODE
or
FTGPARM 44 EN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPR MORROW NEUBER NODE
Changing the mean stress tends to only have effects in the High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) region. The effect
of mean stress gets washed out with Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) problems due to the higher plasticity. This
can be seen in the Morrow equation for mean stress where the mean stress is accounted for only on the
elastic side of the equation. The plot below also illustrates this comparing a strain-life plot with and
without Morrow mean stress correction (note only the HCF side is effected).
Note: If we want to do stress-strain tracking so that we can calculate the maximum or mean stress
of each cycle we need to know what the shape of each arm of a hysteresis loop is. We get this
by using Masing's hypothesis which says that the hysteresis curve is the same shape as the
cyclic stress strain curve, but doubled up in both directions, hence the factors of two in the
equation for the cyclic stress strain curve above.
Ac
2
------
o
f
' o
m
E
-------------------- 2N
f
( )
b
c
f
' 2N
f
( )
c
+ =
Morrow
Mean Stress
Main Index
117
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5-11 Morrow Mean Stress Curve vs. Zero Mean Strain-Life Curve
SWT mean stress correction has the effect of shifting the entire curve and plotting a new parameter on
the right hand side of the equation by multiplying by the maximum stress.
Effect of Surface Finish/Treatment
Different surface treatments and finishes can also be applied as you may have noticed when setting up
analysis jobs. Up to this point we have always set the finish and treatment to either none or a polished
finish (which are the same) signifying that we wish to use the material properties as-is with no
corrections. To meet a design life a different surface finish or treatment can sometimes serve the purpose.
Surface finish and treatment corrections are imposed by changing the material properties. This is
accomplished by changing the slope of the S-N curve or for strain-life curves, the slope of the elastic line
at the Endurance Limit. A scale factor for each finish or treatment is used. These factors are based on the
UTS of the material and derived from empirical data.
Ac
2
------ o
max
o
f
'
2
E
--------- 2N
f
( )
2b
o
f
' c
f
' 2N
f
( )
b c +
+ =
SWT
Mean Stress
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
118
Surface treatments and finishes tend again to only effect HCF jobs. Note that the answers tend to
converge between the various surface finish/treatments at higher load levels. A curve very similar to
Figure 5-11 above results when comparing two strain-life curves, one with polished and one with some
other finish, where only the HCF end is effected.
Note: Shot Peening is a mechanism used to impose a compressive residual stress into the surface,
thus changing the mean stress. However, it is compensated for by surface finish/treatment
techniques.
Main Index
119
CHAPTER 5
Concluding Remarks
This exercise has served to introduce the Crack Initiation method, which uses local strain and is mostly
accredited to Manson and Coffin; the material parameter, c, is named after Coffin. The cyclic stress-
strain curve and the strain-life curve have been introduced as well as the Neuber notch correction
method.
Other Notch Corrections
Other elastic-plastic correction methods are available, which are valuable to use for very low cycle
fatigue where the Neuber method tends to break down and not be as accurate. The Hoffman-Seeger
method is an option.
Stresses vs. Strains
In this example we used stresses from our FE model. We could have just as easily selected the strains to
use instead. We would expect to get exactly the same answers, however there are a few things to be
aware of.
You should be very careful using strains from plate models since the out-of-plane strain (c
z
) is
not calculated, which is needed to determine the proper strain combination parameter (absolute
maximum principal, signed von Mises, etc.), it is safer to use the stresses from the FE analysis.
The strains used for the fatigue analysis are engineering strains as opposed to the strain tensor.
The three shear strain components are multiplied by two to convert them to engineering strain
before using them in a fatigue analysis.
Main Index
Patran Setup
120
Patran Setup
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it spiderCI. Use the Analysis application to
import the first input deck associated with this example: spiderCI_v1.dat. (Action=Read Input
Current Load Case is the imported load case (Untitled.SC1). Select all the LBCs and press the
Apply button. You should see the constraints and 15 KSI pressure load.
Go to the Materials application. Set the Action to Modify and select BS4360-50D. Note the
values in the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If there is no current Strain-Life (eN) constitutive
model, create one. If there is, verify the following parameters, which are written to the MATFTG
entry:
Parameter Value
Constitutive Model: Strain-Life (eN)
Group: None
Type: None
Strength Coefficient 1036.0
Strength Exponent -0.123
Ductility Exponent -0.618
Ductility Coefficient 0.622
Cyclic Strain Hardening Exp 0.163
Cyclic Strength Coefficient 912.0
Cut-off in Reversals 2.0e6
Standard Error Log(e)(elastic) 0.0
Standard Error Log(e)(plastic) 0.0
Standard Error Log(e)(cyclic) 0.0
Conversion Factor 145.0377
Main Index
121
CHAPTER 5
Note the Conversion Factor input here to convert the supplied stress parameters to PSI units,
which are this models consistent units. The stress parameters have been input in MPa. This is
why this Conversion Factor is necessary.
Go to the Element Properties application. Set the Action to Modify. Select the property spider.
Note the properties defined here. Fatigue properties can be defined here but are not. Thus all
defaults are used for this example, so there is no need to modify anything. Values for the fatigue
properties, if defined, are placed on the PFTG entry. All other pertinent properties are part of the
PSOLID entry and related elements for this model.
spiderCI_v1.dat, a job by the name of spiderCI_v1 has been created. Click on it to restore all its
below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done using the OK
buttons.
entry. By default all elements that have an c-N material defined are included in the analysis in
Parameter Value
Stress Units: PSI
Results Loc.: Node
Run eN Analysis Turn this ON
F.E Results Stress
Plasticity Correction: Neuber
Main Index
Patran Setup
122
loading in this example, we want to define a single load event (Event: 1) that associates our 15
KSI subcase called Untitled.SC1 to the load variation defined by an external DAC file
representation. This sine01.dac file should be located in your working directory.
All other cells of the spreadsheet should retain their default values.
However, you want the fatigue life to be reported back as Cycles and not Repeats of the time
history. To do this, right mouse click on the load sequence you created and select Edit
Sequence.... In the subordinate form that appears, change Repeats to Cycles and press Apply.
Data on this form defines the FTGSEQ/FTGEVNT/FTGLOAD/UDNAME entries. You can close
the Load Sequence form using the OK button.
Method=Result Entities. Select the spiderci_v1.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Repeats.
Main Index
123
CHAPTER 5
Or you can define new jobs in the same database by selecting the existing job spiderCI_v1 and then
for each:
spiderCI_v1.dat Baseline - no modifications necessary
spiderCI_v2.dat This example has two differences from the first. Instead of
sine01.dac used to define the load variation, a Patran non-spatial
field is used. The field is identical to that used in Chapter 3: A Simple
S-N Analysis. Please reference that example.
The other difference is that the Output Requests... limit the element
analyzed to only those showing the critical fatigue life. A group is
created that contains all the elements of the model except element
1782, 1783, 2016, 2017, 2250, and 2251. The group is then selected
as part of the Output Requests... as an Elements to Exclude.
spiderCI_v3.dat This example limits the fatigue results to just the critical element just
as the 2nd example above. However it derives the c-N properties
from the UTS of the material. In the Materials application select the
Strain-Life (eN) constitutive model and change it so Option:
Derived, Group: Misc. Steel, Type: Unknown heat treatment. Only
UTS needs to be defined as 480 MPa. Note that changing an existing
material will change this for all defined jobs that have elements
associated with this material.
spiderCI_v4.dat This example is identical to the 2nd example above but uses strains
in the fatigue calculation directly instead of stresses. On the Fatigue
Parameters... form change F.E. Results to Strain.
Main Index
Patran Setup
124
Main Index
Chapter 6: Multiple Loading
6
Multiple Loading
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
126
Problem Description
To this point we have used simple, semi-fabricated examples to illustrate concepts. Now we revert to a
more realistic, real-world example. The model is still simple but the loading is complex. This example
describes a typical multiple load case fatigue analysis. An S-N approach is employed.
Figure 6-1 Aircraft Rear Engine Mounting Lug
The component is a titanium alloy aircraft rear engine mounting lug. It is mounted across the rear of the
aircraft wing and is used to locate a pin which constrains the rear of the engine in the x-y plane. The
engine is restrained in the z-direction (direction of travel) by the front engine mounting. Thrust results in
a downward distribution of pressure and is simulated by a cos2t pressure distribution over a 90 degree
angle, amounting to a resultant force of around 1000 Newtons. The model is composed of 2D quadratic
elements. The lug is mounted very stiffly along its top edge, simulated by constraining this edge for all
degrees-of-freedom.
Loading around the lug hole is simulated by applying 8 different load cases. Each load is a separate
subcase and spaced every 45 degrees. A loading spectrum is available consisting of horizontal and
vertical loads that represent 1000 flights. The design life is approximately 30,000 flights.
Objectives
To assess the fatigue life of safety critical items
Main Index
127
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
To demonstrate setup of multiple loading conditions
To determine the critical location
Figure 6-2 Stress Distribution due to Eight Subcase
As you can see, each load case gives a different stress distribution. It is not clear from these stress plots
where the critical location will be when combined.
Files Required
mountingLUG_v1.dat Original Input File - Entire model
mountingLUG_v2.dat Inside Elements Only
mountingLUG_v3.dat Factor of Safety analysis on inside elements
mountingLUG_v4.dat Fatigue analysis using static offset subcase
xpos.dac
xneg.dac
ypos.dac
yneg.dac
Cyclic load definition file in positive x and y directions and negative
x and y directions
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
128
Fatigue Setup
The setup differences between this model and those previously demonstrated revolves around the cyclic
loading. Therefore only brief descriptions of the material and physical properties and other fatigue
parameters are described. The major portions of the input deck for this model are shown below. There
are two versions of this analysis job, one where all elements of the model are included (see file
mountingLUG_v1.dat) and the other where only the inner ring of elements is included (see file
mountingLUG_v2.dat) as we expect the critical location to be on one of these elements.
Case Control
Eight (8) subcases are defined to simulate the eight different loading conditions. Only the first subcase
definition is fully shown. The FATIGUE output request case control calls out a fatigue analysis using
FTGPARM, FTGDEF, and FTGSEQ bulk data of ID 44
SOL 101
CEND
$
TITLE = Mounting Lug Model (Multiple Loads)
$
FATIGUE = 44
$
SUBCASE 1
SUBTITLE=Load_Case.1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 10
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SUBCASE 2
...
SUBCASE 8
...
BEGIN BULK
...
Main Index
129
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
The SET1 entry below defines the inner ring of elements, which is referenced by the FTGDEF entry to
define the elements on which to do a fatigue analysis. The FTGDEF entry also associates the elements to
physical fatigue properties on the PFTG entry. The entry is shown here with default values set. The S-N
data set is defined on the MATFTG entry, which is associated to its corresponding MAT1 entry of the
same ID that is referenced by a property, in this case a PSHELL entry.
SET1 21 1 THRU 10 51 THRU 60 121
THRU 132 157 THRU 168 193 THRU 204
229 THRU 240
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21 211
...
PFTG 211 0 NONE
...
MAT1 1 120000. 46086.9 .3
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 925.0 986.0 300 -1.0 0.05
SN 1.188E4 -0.2588 1.0E7 0.0
Model Units
The model stress units for this example are MPa. The following bulk data defines the stress units used
in the analysis and passes this information to the fatigue analyzer so that proper unit conversions can be
done when calculating fatigue life. All stress-based parameters on the above MATFTG and MAT1 entries
are thus defined in MPa also.
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
Fatigue Parameters
The FTGPARM entry defines the type of fatigue analysis to be performed. An S-N analysis in this case.
The certainty of survival is set to 96% based on the scatter in the S-N material data. Stress tensor data is
resolved to the ABSolute MAXimum PRincipal stress as the stress parameter to look up on the S-N
curve. A GOODMAN mean stress correction method is to be used and the fatigue life is to be calculated
at the NODEs of all elements defined by the FTGDEF entry.
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPRGOODMAN NODE
CERTNTY 96.0
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
130
Cyclic Loading
The main difference between this analysis and previous examples is the cyclic loading. Up to this point
we have dealt with simple, single location, single direction, cyclic loading. Only one subcase has been
necessary to define the stress state of a single load application.
In this example we have eight load applications, each of which exhibits its own unique stress state. In
practice the load could be in any direction. However for practical reasons we can not have an infinite
number of load cases, so we have applied a finite number around the perimeter of the hole and will
simulate loading in any particular direction by a linear combination of the nearest two load cases. Eight
load cases are set up around the perimeter. However, to simplify things for this example we use only four
of these in the fatigue analysis. Of course, the more load cases you use in a case like this, the more
accurate the simulation of the load distribution at any instant.
The FTGSEQ is called out by the FATIGUE case control. The FTGSEQ defines a loading sequence made
up of load events. In this case we still have only one load sequence made up of a single event defined on
the FTGEVNT entry (see the next Chapter for a duty cycle example). The load event however, is made
up of multiple simultaneously applied loads, each defined on a FTGLOAD entry. Each FTGLOAD entry
associates the stresses from a particular subcase to its cyclic variation of the loading
In this analysis the four load cases used are in positive and negative x and y directions, respectively.
Originally the x and y loadings contained both positive and negative content. The problem with this is
that when you have loading via a pin, as in this case, the stress distribution for a unit negative x loading
is not minus one (-1) times the stress distribution for a positive x loading. Positive and negative loads
have to be treated as separate load cases, with separate load histories. For this reason, the x and y loadings
are separated into positive and negative parts. These measured loads exist in external DAC formatted
files called xpos.dac, ypos.dac, xneg.dac, and yneg.dac and get referenced in the deck on UDNAME
entries. The DB flag specifies that UDNAME entries are to be referenced as opposed to TABLFTG or
TABLED1 entries, which could have just as easily been used.
FTGSEQ 44
33 1.0
UNITS 1000.0 Flights
FTGEVNT 33 101 103 105 107
FTGLOAD 101 111 1 0.924 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 103 113 3 1.023 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 105 115 5 1.121 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 107 117 7 1.218 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 111
./xpos.dac
UDNAME 113
./ypos.dac
UDNAME 115
./xneg.dac
UDNAME 117
./yneg.dac
Points to SUBCASEs 1,
3, 5, & 7, respectively
Main Index
131
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
Note that all the histories have positive values. The stress distributions from the FE analyses will be used
to define the actual sign (positive or negative).
Figure 6-3 Four Cyclic Loads Applied to the Mounting Lug
The load magnitude from each load case is around 1000 N (they vary slightly with each load case). The
cyclic variations have been defined in kNewtons whereas the FE loads use Newtons. To keep the loading
consistent the Load Magnitudes are defined in kNewtons on the LDM (5th) field of the FTGLOAD entry.
Principal of Linear Superposition
We have four load cases all of which vary independently of one another. Fatigue analysis uses the
principle of linear superposition to combine all load cases together to determine the stress variation at
each location due to the combination of all loads. This is done using the following formula:
SUBCASE ID Time History Load Magnitude
1 xpos.dac 0.924
3 ypos.dac 1.023
5 xneg.dac 1.121
7 yneg.dac 1.218
o
i j
t ( ) P
k
t ( )
o
i j k ,
P
f ea k ,
---------------
\ .
| |
k
=
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
132
where the elastic FE stresses, o
ij
, from each load case, k, are normalized by the load magnitude from the
FE analysis, P
fea,k
and then multiplied by the time variation of the loading, P
k
(t). The result of summing
over all load cases gives the total stress time variation at each location of the model. To summarize:
P
k
(t) corresponds to each time history in our example defined on the UDNAME entries and
referenced by the TID (3rd) field of the FTGLOAD entries with DB flag in TYPE (7th) field:
xpos.dac, ypos.dac, xneg.dac, yneg.dac
o
ij,k
are the stresses from each SUBCASE defined in the LCID (4th) field of the FTGLOAD
entries: 1,3, 5, & 7 (only four are used)
P
fea,k
are the load magnitudes used to normalize the stresses from each SUBCASE defined in the
LDM (5th) field of the FTGLOAD entry: 0.924, 1.023, 1.121, 1.218
Or in terms of strains for Crack Initiation jobs:
Figure 6-4 Principle of Linear Superposition in Fatigue Analysis
To summarize the procedure:
1. All load cases are normalized with respect to each FE load case magnitude, i.e., converted to unit
loads, if necessary. This is done by dividing the FE stresses by the load magnitudes and then
multiplying by the time history.
2. All normalized stress time histories for each load case are superimposed using the principal of
linear superposition.
3. The stress time history tensor is resolved down to a single scalar value versus time as defined on
the FTGPARM entry - the stress combination COMB (4th) field.
4. Rainflow cycle counting is performed.
5. Any reductions and corrections (surface finish, mean stress, etc.) are applied.
Main Index
133
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
6. Finally, damage is summed according to the linear damage summation rules.
Each repeat of the combined load history is equal to 1000 flights. This is defined on the FTGSEQ entry
using the UNITS flag. Fatigue lives are reported back in both Repeats of the combined time history and
Flights.
Fatigue Results
Run the mountingLUG_v1.dat or mountingLUG_v2.dat file using a supported version of MSC Nastran
(>2013). Then inspect the mountingLUG.f06 file. Results show a fatigue life of approximately 10
6.4
or
around 2.5 million Flights. The design life of the part is 30,000 Flights.
Factor of Safety Analysis
If you do a factor of safety analysis by including the following in the input deck (see
mountingLUG_v3.dat),
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPRGOODMAN NODE
CERTNTY 96.0
FOS LIFE 30000.0 1.0 20.0
this calculation indicates that a factor of 2.2 would have to be applied to the loads to cause failure
according to the design criterion. However, a factor of 2.2 puts the largest cycle apparently above the
UTS of the material. This is a shortcoming of the S-N method, due to the fact that it does not model
yielding and load redistribution at all. If we wanted to design this component so that it only just survived
the design life, we would need to use the local strain or c-N (strain-life or crack initiation) approach,
which is more appropriate for low-cycle fatigue problems.
Caution: In order to properly do linear superposition, it is important that all the time variations
used in the same analysis have the same sample rate (same number of total points). A
fatal error will occur otherwise.
ID ID ( REPEATS ) (FLIGHTS ) DAMAGE STRESS STRESS FACTOR
165 1062 Z1 0.2650E+04 3.423 0.2650E+07 6.423 0.3774E-03 -3.423 0.4400E+03 0.8350E-01
1120 Z1 0.2387E+04 3.378 0.2387E+07 6.378 0.4189E-03 -3.378 0.4502E+03 0.1658E+01
1117 Z1 0.1070E+05 4.029 0.1070E+08 7.029 0.9349E-04 -4.029 0.3413E+03 0.1838E+01
1059 Z1 0.1109E+05 4.045 0.1109E+08 7.045 0.9020E-04 -4.045 0.3384E+03 0.1127E+01
166 1120 Z1 0.2375E+04 3.376 0.2375E+07 6.376 0.4211E-03 -3.376 0.4506E+03 0.1640E+01
1178 Z1 0.2657E+04 3.424 0.2657E+07 6.424 0.3763E-03 -3.424 0.4403E+03 0.2563E+01
1175 Z1 0.1283E+05 4.108 0.1283E+08 7.108 0.7792E-04 -4.108 0.3283E+03 0.1743E+01
1117 Z1 0.1070E+05 4.029 0.1070E+08 7.029 0.9342E-04 -4.030 0.3412E+03 0.1844E+01
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
134
Stress Offsets
It is also possible to explore offsetting the load by imposing a residual stress or an offset stress state. By
using the STATIC flag in the TYPE field of the FTGLOAD entry a subcases stress state can be used as a
constant offset with no cyclic time variation. In this example, one of the subcases or an additional subcase
could simulate the mounting lug subject to a constant acceleration, thus offsetting the stress states of the
other subcases during the superposition process. Below shows this as if the last subcase of our example
were this offset stress state (see mountingLUG_v4.dat). Note that no cyclic load is associated with this
subcase (TID field is left blank and TYPE=STATIC).
FTGSEQ 44
33 1.0
UNITS 1000.0 Flights
FTGEVNT 33 101 103 105 107
FTGLOAD 101 111 1 0.924 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 103 113 3 1.023 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 105 115 5 1.121 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 107 117 7 1.218 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 108 8 1.0 1.0 0.0 STATIC
UDNAME 111
./xpos.dac
UDNAME 113
./ypos.dac
UDNAME 115
./xneg.dac
UDNAME 117
./yneg.dac
ID ID ( REPEATS ) (FLIGHTS ) DAMAGE STRESS STRESS FACTOR
165 1062 Z1 0.3005E+02 1.478 0.3005E+05 4.478 0.3328E-01 -1.478 0.1000E+04 0.1898E+00 0.2273E+01
1120 Z1 0.2994E+02 1.476 0.2994E+05 4.476 0.3340E-01 -1.476 0.9999E+03 0.3683E+01 0.2221E+01
1117 Z1 0.2980E+02 1.474 0.2980E+05 4.474 0.3356E-01 -1.474 0.1001E+04 0.5391E+01 0.2933E+01
1059 Z1 0.2989E+02 1.476 0.2989E+05 4.476 0.3345E-01 -1.476 0.1001E+04 0.3334E+01 0.2959E+01
166 1120 Z1 0.2973E+02 1.473 0.2973E+05 4.473 0.3364E-01 -1.473 0.1001E+04 0.3644E+01 0.2221E+01
1178 Z1 0.2994E+02 1.476 0.2994E+05 4.476 0.3340E-01 -1.476 0.9991E+03 0.5815E+01 0.2269E+01
1175 Z1 0.2989E+02 1.476 0.2989E+05 4.476 0.3346E-01 -1.475 0.9997E+03 0.5307E+01 0.3045E+01
1117 Z1 0.2983E+02 1.475 0.2983E+05 4.475 0.3353E-01 -1.475 0.1001E+04 0.5408E+01 0.2933E+01
Main Index
135
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
Patran Setup
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it mountingLUG. Use the Analysis
application to import the first input deck associated with this example: mountingLUG_v1.dat.
Current Load Case is set to one of the imported load case (LOAD_CASE.n.SCn), where n
represents the load case number (1-8). Specifically select the force LBC and press the Apply
button. Repeat this for the other Load Cases so you can see how the loading is defined around the
inside of the mounting lug.
Go to the Materials application. Set the Action to Modify and select the only available material.
Note the values in the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If there is no current Stress-Life (SN)
constitutive model, create one. If there is, verify the following parameters, which are written to
the MATFTG entry:
Parameter Value
Group: None
Type: None
Yield Stress 925.0
Stress Range Intercept 1.188e4
Transition Point 1.0e7
Main Index
Patran Setup
136
Go to the Element Properties application. Set the Action to Modify. Select the only property
defined. Note the properties defined here. All fatigue element properties are defined here. Make
sure the following are set below. Any property not mentioned should be left blank. Values for the
fatigue properties, are placed on the PFTG entry. All other pertinent properties are part of the
PSHELL entry and related elements for this model.
mountingLUG_v1.dat, a job by the name of mountingLUG_v1 has been created. Click on it to
restore all its settings. Open the Solution Type... form and then open the Solution Parameters...
form. From here you can check the Fatigue Parameters... Open this form and ensure the
following parameters are set, which are written to the FTGPARM entry. If a parameter is not
mentioned below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done using the
OK buttons.
Still in the Analysis application, click on the Subcases... form. Our subcases are called
LOAD_CASE.n.SCn, where n is the subcase number. Click on LOAD_CASE.1.SC1 from the
Available Subcases list box to access all its settings. Then open the Output Requests... form. It
is best to set this form to the advanced setting (Form Type:).
Parameter Value
[Layer] Worst
[Surface Finish] None
Parameter Value
Stress Units: MPa
Results Loc.: Node
Certainty of Survival (%) 96
Mean Stress Correction: Goodman
Main Index
137
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
the first subcase selected (see the next step) must have the Fatigue Life output request in it. Thus,
it is not necessary in this example to open each subcase and ensure that FATIGUE is set as an
output request.
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). All eight (8) of our
subcases should present in the bottom list box. Now open the Define Fatigue Load Sequences...
form. On this form ensure that the loading associations are set up properly. For the loading in this
example, we want to associate four of the subcase to external DAC files as shown here. Change
the Max # of Static Load Cases to 4 and press the Enter or Return key. This places four rows in
the spreadsheet. The xpos.dac, ypos.dac, xneg.dac, and yneg.dac files should be located in your
working directory. Fill out the spreadsheet as shown here if not already filled out.
Enter the Load Magnitude and press the Enter or Return key. Leave the Scale Factor and Offset
with default values.
Subcase Time History
Load
Magnitude Scale Factor Offset
LOAD_CASE.1.SC1 xpos.dac 0.924 1.0 0.0
LOAD_CASE.3.SC3 ypos.dac 1.023 1.0 0.0
LOAD_CASE.5.SC5 xneg.dac 1.121 1.0 0.0
LOAD_CASE.7.SC7 yneg.dac 1.218 1.0 0.0
Main Index
Patran Setup
138
However, you want the fatigue life to be reported back as Flights and not Repeats of the time
history. Each Repeat is equivalent to 1000 Flights. To do this, right mouse click on the load
sequence you created and select Edit Sequence.... In the subordinate form that appears, change
Repeats to 1000 Flights and press Apply. Make sure the 1000 is place in the data box next to data
box you changed Repeats to Flights.
Method=Result Entities. Select the mountingLUG_v1.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Repeats.
Or you can define new jobs in the same database by selecting the existing job mountingLUG_v1 and then
for each:
mountingLUG_v1.dat Baseline - no modifications necessary
mountingLUG_v2.dat You must create a group with all elements in it except the inner ring
of elements of the mounting lug. The setup is the same as the
previous job except that in the Output Requests... form when
defining Subcases..., select the group you created as Elements to
Exclude as part of the Fatigue Life output request. To be safe, do this
for each subcase in your analysis.
mountingLUG_v3.dat The setup up for this job is the same as the previous job except that
you need to turn ON the Factor of Safety request in the Fatigue
Parameters... form. The Design Life should be set to 30,000
(Flights) and the other parameters can be left with their default
settings.
Main Index
139
CHAPTER 6
Multiple Loading
mountingLUG_v4.dat For this job, turn OFF the Factor of Safety from the previous job and
go to the Define Fatigue Load Sequence... form from the Subcase
Select... form. The Max # of Static Load Cases is now set to 5. All
the Subcase/Time History associations are the same as previous jobs
except for the 5th one now associates LOAD_CASE.8.SC8 to a
STATIC OFFSET, which you select from the Time History (.dac) file
list box.
Main Index
Patran Setup
140
Main Index
Chapter 7: A Simple Duty Cycle
7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
142
Problem Description
In this analysis, the shock tower portion of a vehicle body is analyzed to illustrate more complex loading
in the form of a duty cycle. This particular component has many spot welds and are represented with
CBAR elements. Constraints and loads are applied at certain locations in order to simulate gravity and
road loads. The sheet metal stresses are recovered and used in the fatigue analysis.
Figure 7-1 Vehicle Body Shock Tower Model
Objectives
To illustrate duty cycle fatigue analysis setup and usage.
To determine the critical location due to the imposed loading conditions.
Main Index
143
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Files Required
shocktowerDCY_v1.dat Duty Cycle job - individual event summation run
shocktowerDCY_v2.dat Duty Cycle job - combined event run
shocktowerDCY_v3.dat Duty Cycle job - fast combined event run - using time history
compression
event_a_01.dac
event_a_02.dac
event_a_03.dac
event_b_01.dac
event_b_02.dac
event_b_03.dac
event_c_01.dac
event_c_02.dac
event_c_03.dac
External DAC formatted files describing the cyclic load variation of
each load input for each event.
Main Index
Problem Description
144
Overview
The ability to define a duty cycle is a powerful feature that allows the analyst to assess damage from
multiple sequences and events through an intuitive interface that allows the analyst to set up realistic
usage sequences. A typical usage sequence may be a car running at a certain gross weight and subjected
to various events such as turning, braking, and traveling over potholes.
It is very useful for the analyst to identify which events contribute significant damage in a usage sequence
or which usage sequence (e.g., different weight configurations) causes significant damage. In either case,
the duty cycle capability allows the user to simulate usage profiles (sequences) consisting of multiple
events, as illustrated in this example.
Note that the duty cycle capability may be used in conjunction with the Time History Compression
feature. Time History Compression allows the user to filter out less damaging loading cycles and speeds
up processing. Once the most critical locations are identified, an analysis without time history
compression can be performed to include all loading cycles.
Please familiarize yourself with the following definitions and use figure Figure 7-2 as reference.
Table 7-2 Duty Cycle, Event, and Loading Definitions
Term Description
Sequence or
Load Sequence or
Duty Cycle
One or more cyclic loading events that make up a given usage scenario; e.g., the
events driving over a rough surface and then a smooth surface at a particular
weight configuration may be one sequence. The entire test track in Figure 7-2
would be considered a sequence or duty cycle.
Event
or
Load Event
An event consists of cyclic loading conditions used to define the event. It may
take a number of conditions to completely define an event. For example, a taxi
event for an aircraft may require 1 loading condition at the nose gear and 2 load
conditions at the main landing gears. These conditions act simultaneously
during any given event. Each individual portion of the test track in Figure 7-2
would be considered an event. It is possibly only a portion of the loads making
up an entire event are measured. Thus a repeat factor can be defined to express
the entire event.
Condition or
Load Condition
A particular combination of a MSC Nastran subcase result and an associated
time history file; this may also be referred to as a loading condition. In the
example in Figure 7-2, the load conditions may be the load transfer through the
four wheel contacts with the road, typically broken up into individual
component directions.
Channel
(Monitor Points)
Point on the structure where a load or acceleration data is measured; a channel
or monitor point is normally associated with only one coordinate direction. This
is also the location where loads are applied in the MSC Nastran analysis.
Main Index
145
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Figure 7-2 Typical Duty Cycle Usage of Car on a Test Track
Rules to be Aware Of
1. Sequences of events are defined by the FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT entries. A FTGSEQ can
reference another FTGSEQ (in a nested manner) as a separate and unique event. Therefore all
FTGSEQ and FTGEVNT entries must use unique IDs.
2. For any given fatigue analysis, a FTGSEQ that is referenced by the FATIGUE case control cannot
be nested within another FTGSEQ entry. This will cause an infinite loop in the sequence.
Likewise a FTGSEQ entry that is referenced by a FTGSEQ cannot itself reference the calling
FTGSEQ entry or an infinite loop in the sequence is created.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
146
Fatigue Setup
In this example we concern ourselves only with the loading input. All other inputs for the fatigue analysis
are the same as previous examples and we refer you to the previous Chapters for explanations of those
inputs. Note only that a strain-life analysis (EN) is being performed on only elements of PSHELL
property 111. The portions of the input deck (see shocktowerDCY_v1.dat) of interest for a duty cycle
fatigue analysis are shown below in bold:
SOL 101
CEND
$
TITLE = Shock Tower Model (A Simple Duty Cycle)
$
FATIGUE = 44
$
SUBCASE 1
LABEL = Fz->1000 N
SPC = 1
LOAD = 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = Fy->1000 N
SPC = 1
LOAD = 2
SUBCASE 3
LABEL = Mx->100000 Nmm
SPC = 1
LOAD = 3
$
BEGIN BULK
PARAM,POST,0
$
FTGDEF 44
ELSET 21 211
PFTG 211 0 POLISH
$
FTGPARM 44 EN 1.0 1 3
STRESS ELEMENT
DTI UNITS 1 MPA
$
$ Duty Cycle (Load Sequence) made up of Events A, B, & C
$
FTGSEQ 44 1 0
31 80.0 32 120.0 33 5.0
UNITS 1.0 Laps
$ Event A:
FTGEVNT 31 101 102 103
$ Event B:
FTGEVNT 32 201 202 203
$ Event C:
FTGEVNT 33 301 302 303
$
$ Event A loads
Main Index
147
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
$
FTGLOAD 101 111 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 102 112 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 103 113 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 111
./event_a_01.dac
UDNAME 112
./event_a_02.dac
UDNAME 113
./event_a_03.dac
$
$ Event B loads
$
FTGLOAD 201 211 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 202 212 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 203 213 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 211
./event_b_01.dac
UDNAME 212
./event_b_02.dac
UDNAME 213
./event_c_03.dac
$
$ Event C loads
$
FTGLOAD 301 311 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 302 312 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 303 313 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 311
./event_c_01.dac
UDNAME 312
./event_c_02.dac
UDNAME 313
./event_c_03.dac
$
MAT1 1 200000. .300000
MATFTG 1 1.0
STATIC 404.0 486.0 99
EN 721.0 -0.068 -0.676 0.681 0.15 802.0 2.0+8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.0
$
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
148
Duty Cycle Loading
For the duty cycle analysis, three different loading events are to be considered. These are denoted as
Event A, Event B, and Event C. These events are for illustration purposes only and do not correspond
to any actual, real-world scenario. As this is an automotive example, they could each correspond to
various portions of a test track such as shown in Figure 7-2.
FTGSEQ 44 1 0
31 80.0 32 120.0 33 5.0
UNITS 1.0 Laps
$ Event A:
FTGEVNT 31 101 102 103
$ Event B:
FTGEVNT 32 201 202 203
$ Event C:
FTGEVNT 33 301 302 303
The FTGSEQ entry is called out by the FATIGUE case control (ID 44). The three events that make up this
load sequence or duty cycle are called out on the FTGSEQ entry and the number of times the event is
repeated in the sequence is defined. In this scenario Event A will repeat 80 times, followed by 120 of
Event B and then 5 of Event C. Note also on the FTGSEQ entry that the fatigue equivalent units are set
to Laps. The number of equivalent units is 1.0, thus 1 Repeat of the sequence is equal to 1 Lap.
Tip: Setting the 3rd field on the FTGSEQ entry to one (1) outputs damage for each event as well as
the damage for the entire sequence.
Each event is made up of various load conditions corresponding to each subcase. The IDs referenced on
the FTGEVNT entries correspond to FTGLOAD entries that define the relationship of each subcase to its
cyclic load definition. In this scenario there are three channels of load input corresponding to two forces
and a moment applied at the same point on the model. Thus each event must have three cyclic loads
associated to it.
$ Event A:
FTGEVNT 31 101 102 103
$ Event B:
FTGEVNT 32 201 202 203
$ Event C:
FTGEVNT 33 301 302 303
Event FTGEVNT ID
Number of
Repeats
Event A 31 80.0
Event B 32 120.0
Event C 33 5.0
Main Index
149
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Figure 7-3 Three Channel Input - Load Applications of Shock Tower
The cyclic load definition for each subcase is defined on the FTGLOAD entries. Note that each FTGLOAD
relates the cyclic variation of the load (field 3) to the corresponding case control subcase (field 4). The
cyclic variations of the load are defined in external files defined by the UDNAME entries. TABLFTG or
TABLED1 entries could also have been used.
...
SUBCASE 1
...
SUBCASE 2
...
SUBCASE 3
...
$
BEGIN BULK
$
$ Event A loads
$
FTGLOAD 101 111 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 102 112 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 103 113 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 111
./event_a_01.dac
UDNAME 112
./event_a_02.dac
UDNAME 113
./event_a_03.dac
$
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
150
$ Event B loads
$
FTGLOAD 201 211 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 202 212 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 203 213 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 211
./event_b_01.dac
UDNAME 212
./event_b_02.dac
UDNAME 213
./event_b_03.dac
$
$ Event C loads
$
FTGLOAD 301 311 1 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 302 312 2 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
FTGLOAD 303 313 3 1.0 1.0 0.0 DB
UDNAME 311
./event_c_01.dac
UDNAME 312
./event_c_02.dac
UDNAME 313
./event_c_03.dac
Tip: To remove the effect of an FE load case from an event, the associated time history should be
composed of zero loads throughout the history.
Figure 7-4 Cyclic Load Definitions for each Channel for each Event
Main Index
151
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Fatigue Results
Run the shocktowerDCY_v1.dat file using a supported version of MSC Nastran (>2013). Then inspect
the shocktowerDCY_v1.f06 file.
Duty Cycle Methods
The Duty Cycle feature has three processing options, which are controlled via the METHOD (4th) field
of the FTGSEQ entry. The individual method is used in the shocktowerDCY_v1.dat file. The different
methods are:
Individual: This is the simplest option and the default. Damage from each event is
independently computed. Damage from each event is then summed to determine the overall
damage due to the entire sequence. This is computationally fast but possibly not as accurate if
large, damaging cycles are not accounted for across events (see shocktowerDCY_v1.dat).
Specifying partial repeats of individual events is allowed, such as 1.5 repeats of Event A, 3.3
repeats of Event B, and 0.5 repeats of Event B.
Combined Full: This option concatenates all events for a given channel or monitor point, in an
attempt to ensure that any large cycles are closed even if closing occurs in an event different
than the initiating event. This is computationally more expensive, but more accurate if large,
damaging cycles as mentioned are present (see shocktowerDCY_v2.dat). Specifying fractional
repeats of events is not allowed. Repeats of an event must be specified in whole repeats such as
1.0, 2.0, 3.0, etc. Fractional repeats such as 1.5 will result in an error.
Combined Fast: This option is similar to Combined Full, except that processing speed is
enhanced at the expense of accuracy by using a time history compression algorithm (see
shocktowerDCY_v3.dat). Fractional repeats of events are not allowed.
Time History Compression
Time history compression is a means in which lower damage cycles are ignored in the analysis. Although
this can dramatically speed up processing, it should be used judiciously since some damaging cycles are
filtered out. Generally, time history compression is useful to locate critical locations in a structure in
order to allow detailed analysis in the critical locations. This is especially the case in duty cycle analysis
where typically a large number of time histories is involved, with consequent large computing times
This feature can be controlled via the FTGPARM entry using the RAINFLOW flag. A Peak-Valley
extraction method to slice up the time history is carried out. A rainflow gate is used when setting the
RTYPE field to LOAD. The peak valley slicing causes a reduction in the number time history turning
points so that, when the reduced time history is rainflow cycle counted any cycles that have ranges less
than the gate value are discarded. The gate value can be expressed either as an absolute value in the same
units as the time history (GATE field), or as a percentage (PCTRED field) of the maximum range of the
time history. If GATE is supplied, PCTRED is ignored.
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPR NONE ELEMENT
$----- RAINFLOW RTYPE GATE PCTRED
RAINFLOW LOAD 50.0
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
152
or
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
RAINFLOW LOAD 10.0
Setting the RTYPE field to FAST causes a very severe reduction in the time history. In this case, only the
maximum and minimum values of each channel are retained; all other points are discarded, including the
corresponding points from all the other channels. It approximates the worst cycle, but discards many
other damaging cycles. The GATE and PCTRED fields are ignored in this case.
FTGPARM 44 SN 1.0
RAINFLOW FAST
Figure 7-5 Properties Group pshell.0111
The most critical location is at Element 26283. The damage due to each individual event, and the
summation of all three events are shown for each method. Most of the output shown in the tables below
is available in the F06 file. However if you specify the following, a CSV formatted file is produced that
can be read directly into Excel.
FORMAT(FORMAT=64) = 44
Results do not vary much in this example but it can be seen that concatenating the events produces
different results and the fast method results in the same life, but the job runs five times faster.
Main Index
153
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Table 7-3 Results for Duty Cycle Method: Individual
Elem
ID
Shell
Layer Material Group Damage
Max
Stress
Min
Stress
Max
Strain
Min
Strain
Event
Name
Life
(Laps)
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.09098 356.7 -330.8 0.006291 -0.00419 Event_A 10.99
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.1859 344.7 -323.1 0.005313 -0.00383 Event_B 5.38
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.02995 341.2 -354.0 0.005012 -0.00606 Event_C 33.39
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.3068 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 ALL 3.259
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 83.57 -109.5 4.18E-04 -5.49E-04 Event_A 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 70.27 -108.2 3.51E-04 -5.42E-04 Event_B 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.83 -82.83 4.80E-04 -4.14E-04 Event_C 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.83 -109.5 4.80E-04 -5.49E-04 ALL 1.00E+30
Table 7-4 Results for Duty Cycle Method: Combined Full
Elem
ID
Shell
Max
Stress
Min
Stress
Max
Strain
Min
Strain
Event
Name
Life
(Laps)
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.09111 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 event_A 10.98
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.1865 343.1 -324.7 0.005421 -0.00375 event_B 5.362
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.03001 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 event_C 5.362
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.3076 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 ALL 3.251
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 480E-04 -5.49E-04 event_A 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 70.28 -108.2 3.51E-04 -5.42E-04 event_B 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 4.80E-04 -5.49E-04 event_C 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 4.80E-04 -5.49E-04 ALL 1.00E+30
Table 7-5 Results for Duty Cycle Method: Combined Fast
Elem
ID
Shell
Max
Stress
Min
Stress
Max
Strain
Min
Strain
Event
Name
Life
(Laps)
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.09111 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 event_A 10.98
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.1865 343.1 -324.7 0.005421 -0.00375 event_B 5.362
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.03001 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 event_C 5.362
26283 Bottom Mat1 0.3076 356.7 -354.0 0.006291 -0.00606 ALL 3.251
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 480E-04 -5.49E-04 event_A 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 70.28 -108.2 3.51E-04 -5.42E-04 event_B 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 4.80E-04 -5.49E-04 event_C 1.00E+30
26283 Top Mat1 0.0 95.84 -109.5 4.80E-04 -5.49E-04 ALL 1.00E+30
Main Index
Patran Setup
154
Patran Setup
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it shocktowerDCY. Use the Analysis
application to import the first input deck associated with this example: shocktowerDCY_v1.dat.
Current Load Case is set to one of the imported load case (_FY->1000_N.SC2, _FZ-
>1000_N.SC1, _MX->100000_NMM.SC3). Specifically select the force LBC and press the Apply
button. Repeat this for the other Load Cases so you can see how the loading is defined for the three
load cases.
Go to the Materials application. Set the Action to Modify and select the only available material.
Note the values in the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If there is no current Strain-Life (eN)
constitutive model, create one. If there is, verify the following parameters, which are written to
the MATFTG entry:
Parameter Value
Constitutive Model: Strain-Life (eN)
Group: None
Type: None
Ultimate Tensile Stress 486.0
Yield Stress 404.0
Strength Coefficient 721.0
Strength Exponent -0.068
Ductility Exponent -0.676
Ductility Coefficient 0.681
Cyclic Strain Hardening Exp 0.15
Cyclic Strength Coefficient 802.0
Cut-off in Reversals 2.0e6
Standard Error Log(e)(elastic) 0.0
Standard Error Log(e)(plastic) 0.0
Standard Error Log(e)(cyclic) 0.0
Main Index
155
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Go to the Element Properties application. Set the Action to Modify. Select the property of
interest for our fatigue analysis: pshell.111. Note the properties defined here. All fatigue element
properties are defined here. Make sure the following are set below. Any property not mentioned
should be left blank. Values for the fatigue properties, are placed on the PFTG entry. All other
pertinent properties are part of the PSHELL entry and related elements for this model.
shocktowerDCY_v1.dat, a job by the name of shocktowerDCY_v1 has been created. Click on it
to restore all its settings. Open the Solution Type... form and then open the Solution
Parameters... form. From here you can check the Fatigue Parameters... Open this form and
ensure the following parameters are set, which are written to the FTGPARM entry. If a parameter
is not mentioned below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done
using the OK buttons.
Still in the Analysis application, click on the Subcases... form. Our subcases are called: _FY-
>1000_N.SC2, _FX->1000_N.SC1, _MX->100000_NMM.SC3. Click on the first one from the
Available Subcases list box to access all its settings. Then open the Output Requests... form. Set
this form to the advanced setting (Form Type:).
which case a FTGDEF entry is not actually needed. From the Select Property Sets list box, select
only pshell.111. Press the Apply button on the Subcases... form to save the new output request
settings.
Parameter Value
[Layer] Worst
Parameter Value
Stress Units: MPa
Results Loc.: Element
Run eN Analysis Turn this ON
Main Index
Patran Setup
156
output request.
Step 5: Check the Cyclic Load Definition (Duty Cycle)
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). All three (3) of our
subcases should present in the bottom list box. Now open the Define Fatigue Load Sequences...
form. On this form ensure that the loading associations are set up properly. For the loading in this
example, we want to associate the subcase to various external DAC files as shown here for
different load events - three (3) distinct load events in all. Change the Max # of Static Load Cases
to 3 and press the Enter or Return key. This places three rows in the spreadsheet for each layer of
the spreadsheet. Each layer represents a different load event.
For Event 1, set the Event Name to Event A. The arrow buttons will allow you to move up and
down between the events. Or you can type in the event number in the Event data box to go to that
event. Fill out the spreadsheet as shown here if not already filled out.
Click on the down arrow button to go to Event 2 and set the Event Name to Event B. Fill out the
spreadsheet as shown here if not already filled out.
Load
_FZ->1000_N.SC1 event_a_01.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_FY->1000_N.SC2 evetn_a_02.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_MX->100000_NMM.SC3 event_a_03.dat 1.0 1.0 0.0
Load
_FZ->1000_N.SC1 event_b_01.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_FY->1000_N.SC2 evetn_b_02.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_MX->100000_NMM.SC3 event_b_03.dat 1.0 1.0 0.0
Main Index
157
CHAPTER 7
A Simple Duty Cycle
Click on the down arrow button to go to Event 3 and set the Event Name to Event C. Fill out the
spreadsheet as shown here if not already filled out.
mouse button click on the new sequence and Add Event. Select the Event A, change the Repeat
number to 80 and press Apply. Do this two more times for Event B and Event C with Repeat
numbers of 120 and 5, respectively. The load sequence or duty cycle has now been defined.
However, you want the fatigue life to be reported back as Laps and not Repeats of the load
sequence. Also the load sequence is to be called Track 1. Each Repeat of the duty cycle is equal
to 1 Lap(s) around Track 1. To do this, right mouse click on the load sequence you created and
select Edit Sequence.... In the subordinate form that appears, change Repeats to Laps, change the
Load Sequence Name to Track 1, turn ON the Output Events toggle, and press Apply.
Note that you can view the time histories by using the Time History Manager button. This
Method=Result Entities. Select the shocktowerDCY_v1.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Repeats. You will note that results for each event and results of the combined events are
accessible.
Or you can define new jobs in the same database by selecting the existing job shocktowerDCY_v1 and
then renaming it and making the modifications as necessary. The table below lists the modifications
necessary for each:
Load
_FZ->1000_N.SC1 event_c_01.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_FY->1000_N.SC2 evetn_c_02.dac 1.0 1.0 0.0
_MX->100000_NMM.SC3 event_c_03.dat 1.0 1.0 0.0
Main Index
Patran Setup
158
shocktowerDCY_v1.dat Baseline - no modifications necessary
shocktowerDCY_v2.dat In the Load Sequences... form, right mouse click the load sequence
we named Track 1 and change the Event Process Method to
Combined Full and resubmit the job.
shocktowerDCY_v3.dat In the Load Sequences... form, right mouse click the load sequence
we named Track 1 and change the Event Process Method to
Combined Fast and resubmit the job.
Main Index
Chapter 8: Modal Transient Analysis
8
Modal Transient Analysis
Problem Description
Quasi-static Method
Modal Transient Method
Modal Method
Concluding Remarks
Patran Setup
Main Index
Problem Description
160
Problem Description
A cantilever beam is used to illustrate the modal stress recovery method. Up to this point, the quasi-static
stress recovery method has been used using linear static analysis through SOL 101. Now the same basic
procedure is used in modal (SOL 103) and modal transient (SOL 112) analysis.
The model is subject to four different loading conditions. A unit axial, horizontal, and vertical load are
placed at one of the outside edges of the end of the cantilevered beam. Each load is allowed to act
individually as well as all three simultaneously, making four load conditions in total.
The model is made up of various different solid element types and the upper and lower portions are
skinned with shell elements. Mass elements are place on the model to lower the first natural frequency
to around 40 Hz.
Figure 8-1 Cantilever Beam with Unit Loads
Objectives
To illustrate the modal stress recovery method in fatigue analysis using both modal analysis
(SOL 103) and modal transient analysis (SOL 112)
To compare the quasi-static stress recovery method (SOL 101) to the modal stress recovery
method.
The model used is for illustrative purposes only. The cyclic loading variation is arbitrary and applied in
the same way to all four loading conditions. The resulting stress time histories are scaled to produce a
target or design life of 1000 Repeats of the applied cyclic loading. To determine the proper scale factors,
first a factor of safety analysis is done. Then the fatigue analysis is done using the scale factors produced
from the factor of safety analysis to show that the loads are properly scaled to give a life of 1000 Repeats
at a particular element of interest (Element 245).
Main Index
161
CHAPTER 8
Files Required
cant_beam101.dat Quasi-static SOL101 fatigue analysis
cant_beam103.dat Modal stress SOL 103 fatigue analysis
cant_beam112.dat Modal transient SOL 112 fatigue analysis
cant_beam_axial.inc
cant_beam_horiz.inc
cant_beam_vert.inc
cant_beam_all.inc
Include files for cant_beam103.dat for definition of the modal
participation factors (modal responses), located in
nast/tpl/include.
Main Index
Quasi-static Method
162
Quasi-static Method
To begin, look at the cant_beam101.dat file and run it through MSC Nastran. Note that nine (9) different
fatigue analyses are carried out in just the one input deck. The first three are to do factor of safety analyses
to determine the scale factors necessary to scale the resultant stress time variations to achieve a design
life of 1000 Repeats. This can be done because the analysis is linear. The unit loads simply give the stress
distribution due to each. The fatigue analysis scales the stress distribution by the corresponding cyclic
variation to give a resultant stress time history from which rainflow cycle counting and subsequent
damage look up and summation are performed. Note the following for the first three fatigue analyses.
SOL 101
CEND
$
SET 1 = 101,102,103,201,202,203,350,450,550
FATIGUE(SET) = 1
$
SUBCASE 1
SUBTITLE=Axial
...
SUBCASE 2
SUBTITLE=Horizontal
...
SUBCASE 3
SUBTITLE=Vertical
...
$
BEGIN BULK
$
DTI UNITS 1 PSI
SET1 1 1 THRU 5 20 THRU 30 59
THRU 70 99 THRU 100 239 THRU 254
283 THRU 292 321 THRU 332
FTGDEF 101
ELSET 1
FTGDEF 102
ELSET 1
FTGDEF 103
ELSET 1
$
FTGPARM 101 SN 1.0
STRESS ABSMAXPR GOODMAN ELEM
FOS LIFE 1000.0 1.0 20.0
FTGPARM 102 SN 1.0
FOS LIFE 1000.0 1.0 20.0
FTGPARM 103 SN 1.0
FOS LIFE 1000.0 1.0 20.0
Three separate subcases, one for each unit load
in the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions.
Stress units of this model
are in PSI.
Only shell elements near the base of the
beam are of interest.
Factor of safety analysi
with target life of 1000
Repeats determined at
the element centroids.
Goodman mean stress
correction with stress
parameter Max Abs.
Principal
Main Index
163
CHAPTER 8
The second three fatigue analyses use the scale factors from the first three analyses. The fatigue life at
our element of interest from three fatigue analyses, by definition, must be around 1000 Repeats. All of
these analyses are show in the same input deck for convenience purposes. Naturally to do this, one would
need to run the first three analyses before the second three to determine the scale factors. Note the
following from the portions of the deck that set up these fatigue analyses.
The next fatigue analysis (350) is a factor of safety analysis with all three loads acting simultaneously.
And the subsequent one after that is the actual fatigue analysis using the scale factor just as was done
with the three loads acting individually (again at the element of interest). In this case the loading event
is three simultaneously acting loads and the previous scale factors determined when acting individually
are used. It is know that each load individually produces a life of approximately 1000 Repeats. It is not
$
$ Factor of Safety - Target Life = 1000 Repeats
$ 101 = Axial Load Only
$ 102 = Horizontal Load Only
$ 103 = Vertical Load Only
$
FTGLOAD 101 99 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 102 99 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 103 99 3 1.0 1.0 0.0
Fatigue analysis 101 associates subcase 1 (axial load)
with time variation defined in TABLED1 99 (not
shown), likewise, 102 with subcase 2 (horizontal load),
and 103 with subcase 3 (vertical load).
FTGDEF 201
ELSET 1
FTGDEF 202
ELSET 1
FTGDEF 203
ELSET 1
$
FTGPARM 201 SN 1.0 1 3
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGLOAD 201 99 1 1.0 1.19200 0.0
FTGLOAD 202 99 2 1.0 0.01191 0.0
FTGLOAD 203 99 3 1.0 3.261-3 0.0
The same set of elements used and the same
parameters set except that no factor of safety
analysis is performed, thus only damage and
fatigue life are calculated.
These are the scale factors deter-
mined from the first three fatigue
analyses.
Main Index
Quasi-static Method
164
know whether all three acting simultaneously would produce more or less damage. So again a scale factor
is determined such that all three acting simultaneously produce a target life of 1000 Repeats at the
element of interest. Because the scale factor is less than one, this tells us that all three load applied
simultaneously is far more damaging than each individually.
To apply the scale factor in the subsequent fatigue analysis (450), the reciprocal of the scale factor is used
in the LDM field out of convenience rather than multiplying it by each individual scale factor to get the
new scale factor for each load. The LDM field is a divisor as opposed to a multiplier.
Tip: You could also just put the scale factor in the FACTOR field on the FTGPARM entry since
this is an overall scale factor applied to the resulting stress variation rather than to individual
loading.
The ninth and final fatigue analysis in this input deck is a duty cycle analysis where each individual load
is set up to act sequentially. Each acting individually produces a fatigue life of 1000 Repeats at our
element of interest. This analysis determines how many times each can act sequentially. We would expect
about 1/3 or 333 Repeats assuming the individual method of load sequence analysis as described in a
previous example. Since the loads do not act simultaneously, but sequentially, the scale factor determined
from the simultaneous run is not used.
FTGDEF 350
ELSET 1
FTGDEF 450
ELSET 1
$
FOS LIFE 1000.0 1.0 20.0
$
$
$ 350 = All Three Loads Simultaneously
$
FTGSEQ 350
351
FTGEVNT 351 301 302 303
FTGLOAD 301 99 1 1.0 1.19200 0.0
FTGLOAD 302 99 2 1.0 0.01191 0.0
FTGLOAD 303 99 3 1.0 3.261-3 0.0
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 450
451
FTGEVNT 451 401 402 403
FTGLOAD 401 99 1 3.51 1.19200 0.0
FTGLOAD 402 99 2 3.51 0.01191 0.0
FTGLOAD 403 99 3 3.51 3.261-3 0.0
The same set of elements used
All three loads, each scaled by the
previously calculated scale factors.
Factor of safety analysis.
Fatigue analysis only.
New scale factor applies in LDM
field as reciprocal.
Main Index
165
CHAPTER 8
Table 8-2 Scale Factors (Target Life = 1000 Repeats) at Element 245 (SOL 101)
Loading
Load Magnitude
(Divisor) Scale Factor Fatigue Life
axial 1.0 1.192 ~1000 Repeats
horizontal 1.0 0.01191 ~1000 Repeats
vertical 1.0 0.003116 ~1000 Repeats
all three simultaneous 3.51 1.192 (axial)
0.01191 (horizontal)
0.003116 (vertical)
~1000 Repeats
all three sequentially 1.0 1.192 (axial)
0.01191 (horizontal)
0.003116 (vertical)
~333 Repeats
FTGDEF 550
ELSET 1
$
$
$ SN Analysis
$ 550 = All Three Loads Sequentially
$
FTGSEQ 550 1 0
551 1.0 552 1.0 553 1.0
FTGEVNT 551 501
FTGEVNT 552 502
FTGEVNT 553 503
FTGLOAD 501 99 1 1.0 1.192 0.0
FTGLOAD 502 99 2 1.0 0.01191 0.0
FTGLOAD 503 99 3 1.0 3.261-3 0.0
The same set of elements used
and fatigue parameters.
All three loads, each scaled by the
previously calculated scale factors.
Main Index
166
Now the same thing is done with a modal transient analysis using SOL 112. Before going into detail on
the modal transient analysis, let us first review what the SOL 101 quasi-static fatigue analysis is doing
when dealing with multiple load conditions acting simultaneously so that a comparison can be done with
the modal method. Refer to the figure below.
Figure 8-2 Quasi-Static Stress Recovery Method
Fatigue analysis requires a resultant stress time history. This time history is derived by taking the cyclic
variations of each load (L
i
in the above illustration) and multiplying them by the corresponding stress
state from a static subcase (o
iA
in the above illustration), typically each is a subcase with a single unit
load. Using the principle of linear superposition, the resulting stress time histories from each subcase are
combined into one single time history. The result is a stress tensor time history. A single scalar stress is
derived form the tensor (such as a signed von Mises or Maximum Absolute Principal) at each time step
resulting in a single scalar stress time history from which subsequent rainflow cycle counting can be
done, damage summed, and fatigue life calculated.
Now look at a similar illustration when doing this in modal space.
Main Index
167
CHAPTER 8
Figure 8-3 Modal Stress Recovery Method
The difference between the two methods is that the unit static loads are replaced by the mode shapes
(modal stresses - |
A1
in the above illustration) and the load time histories are replaced with the modal
responses for each mode shape, sometimes know as modal participation factors or vectors or loads (q
1
(t)
in the above illustration). These are all derived internally to the modal transient SOL 112 analysis.
Tip: The modal responses can be output to an external file by using
SDISPLACEMENTS(PUNCH) = ALL in the case control. It will be clear why one may want
to do this in the next section.
It is assumed that the user understands basic dynamic analysis. No explanation of the actual dynamic
analysis is given here and the user is referred to the Nastran Basic Dynamic Analysis Users Guide.
Now let us look at the input deck cant_beam112.dat. Note that the FTGDEF and FTGPARM entries in
this input deck are identical to those in the cant_beam101.dat deck, so no additional explanation is given
here. Only the loading definitions differ.
Main Index
168
The loading definitions differ as shown below in that no FTGLOAD or FTGEVNT entries are required for
a SOL 112 analysis. This is because the cyclic variations of the load are defined directly by the dynamic
loading (DLOAD case control) and each subcase of a SOL 112 analysis is an actual loading event in
fatigue analysis terminology. All loads acting simultaneously must be applied directly in the subcase, and
thus that fully defines a load event. Individual load events can still be combined using the FTGSEQ
entries to define a duty cycle. Therefore, the FIDi fields of the FTGSEQ entry refer to SOL 112 subcase
IDs instead of FTGEVNT IDs.
SOL 112
CEND
$
SET 1 = 101,102,103,201,202,203,350,450,550
FATIGUE(SET) = 1
$
ECHO=NONE
RESVEC = NO
METHOD = 1
TSTEP = 1
SPC = 2
LOADSET = 5
SDISPLACEMENT(PUNCH)=ALL
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
$
SUBCASE 1
SUBTITLE=Axial
DLOAD = 6
SUBCASE 2
SUBTITLE=Horizontal
DLOAD = 8
SUBCASE 3
SUBTITLE=Vertical
DLOAD = 10
SUBCASE 4
SUBTITLE=All Loads
DLOAD = 12
$
BEGIN BULK
PARAM POST 0
PARAM GRDPNT 0
PARAM PRTMAXIM YES
$
TSTEP 1 108 1.0
EIGRL 1 10
$
DTI UNITS 1 PSI
Now four separate subcases are required, one
for each unit load in the axial, horizontal, and
vertical directions and one with the combina-
tion of all three acting simultaneously.
Each is considered as its own fatigue loading
event.
Note there are 108 time steps in the cyclic def-
inition of the loading and uses the same
TABLED1 entry (not shown) as the SOL 101
analysis.
Again, stress units of this
model are in PSI.
Main Index
169
CHAPTER 8
Note that the scale factors applied from the factor of safety analyses onto the actual fatigue analyses are
placed on the SCALE field of the FTGPARM entries (not shown) as opposed to the FTGLOAD entries,
since there is none. We do not expect to derive the same scale factors as the pseudo-static method in this
case as the dynamic effects cause a different stress distribution. As the mass effects become more and
more negligible, one would expect the results from the dynamic and pseudo-static methods to converge.
$
$
FTGSEQ 101
1 1.0
FTGSEQ 102
2 1.0
FTGSEQ 103
3 1.0
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 201
1 1.0
FTGSEQ 202
2 1.0
FTGSEQ 203
3 1.0
$
$
FTGSEQ 350
4 1.0
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 450
4 1.0
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 550 1 0
1 1.0 2 1.0 3 1.0
Factor of safety analysis 101 is associated
with subcase 1 (axial load). Likewise,
102 with subcase 2 (horizontal load), and
103 with subcase 3 (vertical load).
Fatigue analysis 201 is associated with
subcase 1 (axial load). Likewise, 202
with subcase 2 (horizontal load), and 203
with subcase 3 (vertical load).
Factor of safety analysis 350 is associated with
subcase 4 (all loads acting simultaneously).
Fatigue analysis 450 is associated with subcase 4
(all loads acting simultaneously). Fatigue analysis
550 is a duty cycle analysis with all three loads act-
ing sequentially.
Main Index
170
Tip: There are different ways of scaling the resultant cyclic stresses.
Fatigue Parameters (FTGPARM entry): An overall scale factor can be applied using the
FACTOR field. This scales the entire resulting stress time history used in the rainflow
counting procedure.
Fatigue Properties (PFTG entry): A scale factor and/or an offset can be applied using the
SCALE and/or OFFSET fields. These are applied to the entire resulting stress time history but
only to the elements referenced by the PFTG entry. PFTG entries are referenced by the fatigue
element definitions (FTGDEF) entries, which define the elements on which the fatigue
properties are assigned.
Fatigue Loading (FTGLOAD entry): A divisor, scale factor, and/or offset can be applied using
the LDM, SCALE, and OFFSET fields. These are applied to each individual cyclic load
before the superposition in the case of multiple loadings and used only in the modal (SOL 103)
and pseudo-static (SOL 101) methods. Modal transient analysis (SOL 112) does not use
FTGLOAD. The alternative for SOL 112 is described next.
Dynamic Load Definition (DLOAD entry): Scale factors can be applied directly on the
DLOAD entry for modal transient analysis and is the preferred method as FTGLOAD entries
cannot be used for scaling the loads in modal transient analysis.
All scale factors applied in any of the above are cumulative.
Loading Scale Factor Fatigue Life
axial 2.077E-2 ~1000 Repeats
horizontal 3.807E-3 ~1000 Repeats
vertical 1.058E-3 ~1000 Repeats
all three simultaneous 8.873E-4 ~1000 Repeats
all three sequentially 2.077E-2 (axial)
3.807E-3 (horizontal)
1.058E-3 (vertical)
~333 Repeats
Main Index
171
CHAPTER 8
Modal Method
What is done internally using SOL 112 can be simulated exactly with SOL 103 using plain modal
analysis. The difference is that the user must supply the modal responses directly. SOL 112 can provide
these to the user using SDISPLAMENT(PUNCH)=ALL in the case control, and they can also be derived
using other external methods such as provided in some motion packages like ADAMS.
Please reference input deck cant_beam103.dat. Note the case control for the SOL 103 deck.
Note: Only one subcase is allowed as the fatigue analysis needs a common set of modes. Should
more than one subcase exist, only modes from the first subcase will be used for the fatigue
analysis. This is also true for SOL 112. A common set of boundary conditions is needed if
combining subcases (load events) into a duty cycle. Thus the same constraint is imposed on
SOL 112 - only one set of modes is allowed. So the METHOD case control needs to be
common to all subcases and the boundary conditions need to be the same between all subcase.
For our example, the modal responses have been extracted from the SOL 112 run and converted to
TABLED1 entries contained in four different include files: cant_beam_axial.inc, cant_beam_horiz.inc,
cant_beam_vert.inc, cant_beam_all.inc. The modal analysis requests 10 modes. Thus there are 10 modal
responses (10 TABLED1 entries) for each loading condition. Each modal response contains 108 points,
the same number of points as defined by the dynamic load.
Again the FTGDEF and FTGPARM entries are the same between this and the previous two input decks
for SOL 101 and SOL 112 (except the scale factors from the factor of safety analyses are placed in the
SCALE field of the FTGPARM entries).
For a SOL 103 analysis, the loading is set up exactly the way a pseudo-static SOL 101 analysis is setup.
The differences are that the FTGLOAD LCID field points to a mode shape number instead of a static
subcase with a unit load. Thus the FTGLOAD entries associate the modal response to the corresponding
modal stresses. Each FTGEVNT entry must reference each FTGLOAD association, one per mode.
SOL 103
CEND
$
SET 1 = 101,102,103,201,202,203,350,450,550
FATIGUE(SET) = 1
$
ECHO=NONE
RESVEC = NO
METHOD = 1
SPC = 2
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
$
SUBCASE 1
SUBTITLE=Normal Modes
$
BEGIN BULK
Only one subcase is allows (one set of modes).
Main Index
Modal Method
172
$
$
FTGSEQ 101
111 1.0
FTGEVNT 111 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106
1107
1108 1109 1110
FTGLOAD 1101 101 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1102 102 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1103 103 3 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1104 104 4 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1105 105 5 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1106 106 6 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1107 107 7 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1108 108 8 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1109 109 9 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1110 110 10 1.0 1.0 0.0
$
FTGSEQ 102
121 1.0
FTGEVNT 121 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206
1207
1208 1209 1210
FTGLOAD 1201 201 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1202 202 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1203 203 3 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1204 204 4 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1205 205 5 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1206 206 6 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1207 207 7 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1208 208 8 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1209 209 9 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1210 210 10 1.0 1.0 0.0
$
FTGSEQ 103
131 1.0
FTGEVNT 131 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306
1307
1308 1309 1310
FTGLOAD 1301 301 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1302 302 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1303 303 3 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1304 304 4 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1305 305 5 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1306 306 6 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1307 307 7 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1308 308 8 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1309 309 9 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 1310 310 10 1.0 1.0 0.0
Factor of safety analysis 101 is associated
with axial load modal responses. Like-
wise, 102 with horizontal and 103 with
vertical modal responses.
These are the mode numbers (LCID field).
These are the TABLED1 IDs of the modal responses.
Main Index
173
CHAPTER 8
Fatigue analyses 201, 202, and 203 are set up the same except the scale factors are defined on the
FTGPARM entry to give a life of 1000 Repeats based on the results from fatigue analyses 101, 102, and
103, respectively.
$
$ Fatigue Parameters - SN Analysis
$
FTGPARM 201 SN 2.077-2
FTGPARM 202 SN 3.807-3
FTGPARM 203 SN 1.05E-3
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 201
111 1.0
$
FTGSEQ 202
121 1.0
$
FTGSEQ 203
131 1.0
$
INCLUDE './cant_beam_axial.inc'
INCLUDE './cant_beam_horiz.inc'
INCLUDE './cant_beam_vert.inc'
Fatigue analysis 201 is associated with axial
load modal responses. Likewise, 202 with
horizontal and 203 with vertical modal re-
sponses.
Note that the same FTGEVNT entries are
referenced as they do not change (same
modes and same modal response/mode as-
sociation).
Include file references that contain the
modal responses as TABLED1 entries.
Main Index
Modal Method
174
Factor of safety analysis 350 is associated to modal responses due to all loads acting simultaneously.
Fatigue analysis 450 is associated to modal responses due to all loads acting simultaneously. Note that
the event (FTGEVNT entry) that make up fatigue analysis 450 has already been previously defined and
reference by previous analyses. The scale factor determined by analysis 350 is applied in 450 to give the
desired life of 1000 Repeats.
Fatigue analysis 550 is a duty cycle analysis where the three individual loads are applied sequentially.
Note that the events (FTGEVNT entries) that make up fatigue analysis 550 were already previously
defined but are redefined here with the loads being scaled by the scale factors computed by analyses 101,
102, and 103. Each separately give a life of approximately 1000 Repeats. So as before, we would expect
all three acting sequentially in this manner to sum the damage to give approximately 1/3 of the life of any
one acting individually, or in other words, approximately 333 Repeats at the element of interest.
FTGPARM 350 SN 1.0
FOS LIFE 1000.0 1.0 20.0
$
$
FTGSEQ 350
351 1.0
FTGEVNT 351 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005 3006 3007
3008 3009 3010
FTGLOAD 3001 401 1 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3002 402 2 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3003 403 3 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3004 404 4 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3005 405 5 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3006 406 6 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3007 407 7 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3008 408 8 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3009 409 9 1.0 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 3010 410 10 1.0 1.0 0.0
Factor of safety analysis 350 is associated with mod
responses due to all loads acting simultaneously.
TABLED1 IDs of modal responses.
Mode numbers
associated to
each modal re-
sponse.
FTGPARM 450 SN 8.873E-4
STRESS ABSMAXPR GOODMAN ELEM$
$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 450
351
INCLUDE './cant_beam_all.inc'
$
Fatigue analysis 450 is associated with load modal
responses due to all loads acting simultaneously.
Include file reference that contains the
modal responses as TABLED1 entries for
the three combined loads.
Main Index
175
CHAPTER 8
$$
$ SN Analysis
$
FTGSEQ 550 1 0
511 1.0 521 1.0 531 1.0
$
$
FTGEVNT 511 5101 5102 5103 5104 5105 5106 5107
5108 5109 5110
FTGLOAD 5101 101 1 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5102 102 2 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5103 103 3 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5104 104 4 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5105 105 5 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5106 106 6 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5107 107 7 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5108 108 8 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5109 109 9 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5110 110 10 2.077-2 1.0 0.0
FTGEVNT 521 5201 5202 5203 5204 5205 5206 5207
5208 5209 5210
FTGLOAD 5201 201 1 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5202 202 2 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5203 203 3 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5204 204 4 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5205 205 5 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5206 206 6 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5207 207 7 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5208 208 8 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5209 209 9 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5210 210 10 3.807-3 1.0 0.0
$
FTGEVNT 531 5301 5302 5303 5304 5305 5306 5307
5308 5309 5310
FTGLOAD 5301 301 1 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5302 302 2 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5303 303 3 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5304 304 4 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5305 305 5 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5306 306 6 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5307 307 7 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5308 308 8 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5309 309 9 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
FTGLOAD 5310 310 10 1.058-3 1.0 0.0
Fatigue analysis 550 is a duty
cycle analysis where each in-
dividual load is applied se-
quentially once each.
Main Index
Modal Method
176
The factor of safety scale factors between the SOL 112 and SOL 103 run are, as expected, identical.
Loading Scale Factor Fatigue Life
axial 2.077E-2 ~1000 Repeats
horizontal 3.807E-3 ~1000 Repeats
vertical 1.058E-3 ~1000 Repeats
all three simultaneous 8.873E-4 ~1000 Repeats
all three sequentially 2.077E-2 (axial)
3.807E-3 (horizontal)
1.058E-3 (vertical)
~333 Repeats
Main Index
177
CHAPTER 8
Concluding Remarks
To conclude, here is a summary of the difference and similarities between using quasi-static, normal
modes, or modal transient analysis to perform fatigue analysis along with some limitation to be aware of.
Modal transient analysis (SOL 112) and modal analysis (SOL 103) use identical methods to
compute fatigue life. The difference is that SOL 112 does everything internally as all the loading
is defined directly in a SOL 112 job, and thus the modal responses determined automatically.
For SOL 103, the modal responses must be provided and associated to each mode in order to do
the linear superposition to compute the cyclically varying stress responses.
Both the pseudo-static (SOL 101) and modal stress recover methods (SOL 103 or 112) are
mathematically identical. Once the data are provided, the internal computation (the principle of
linear superposition) to determine the cyclically varying stress responses does not know whether
the method is pseudo-static or modal in nature.
Practically though, the difference between the pseudo-static and modal stress recovery methods
with respect to the principle of linear superposition are:
pseudo-static method uses unit loads; modal method uses mode shapes
pseudo-static method uses load time histories; modal method uses modal responses for each
mode shape
Modal transient (SOL 112) subcases are loading events in fatigue analysis terminology. By
definition they contain all simultaneously applied loads. Therefore they are equivalent to
multiple subcases to define a single load event using the quasi-static (SOL 101) method.
Boundary conditions must not change from subcase to subcase in a modal transient analysis
(SOL 112) when doing fatigue analysis where load events are combined into a duty cycle. The
mode shapes must be identical for each subcase.
Only one subcase can be used in fatigue analysis using the modal method (SOL 103). If more
than one subcase is present, the modes from the first subcase are used for all loading events for
the purposes of the linear superposition to determine the resulting response time history.
The modal stress recovery method provides computationally efficiency. One might ask: beside
accounting for dynamic affect, why use this method over the pseudo-static method? The answer
is because it reduces the size of the problem down to an m x 6 + m x k problem as opposed to an
n x 6 + l x k problem where n is the number of locations (nodes or element centroids) and m is
the number of mode shapes, k is the number of time steps, and l is the number of loads. So for
example to compute fatigue life at 200 nodes (n) with 100 loads (l), each with 108 time points
(k) is 12,000 data points. If 10 modes (m) are retained, the modal method reduces this to 1,140
data points. Naturally, the more loads there are and the less modes retained, the smaller the
problem size. Six (6) is the number of components is a stress tensor.
Likewise: why not just pass the resulting stress time histories from the SOL 112 analysis to the
fatigue analyzer? The answer is because this reduces the amount of data passed to the fatigue
analyzer from n x 6 x k to m x k + m x n. So as an example, a model with 200 locations and 108
time points is 129,600 data points. But for the modal method with 10 mode shapes, this is 10 x
108 + 10 x 200 = 3,080 data points.
Main Index
Patran Setup
178
Patran Setup
This Chapter has three separate solutions solved for SOL 101, 103, and 112. Each is explained separately.
SOL 101: cant_beam101.dat
Start Patran and open a new Patran database and call it cant_beam. Use the Analysis application
to import the input deck associated with this example: cant_beam101.dat. (Action=Read Input
Current Load Case is set to one of the imported load cases (e.g.: AXIAL.SCn), where n represents
the load case number (1-3). Specifically select the force LBC and press the Apply button. Repeat
this for the other Load Cases so you can see how the loading is defined on the outer edge of the
beam.
Go to the Materials application. Set the Action to Modify and select the only available material
(steel). Note the values in the Linear Elastic constitutive model. If there is no current Stress-Life
(SN) constitutive model, create one. If there is, verify the following parameters, which are written
to the MATFTG entry. Please note the stress parameters are entered in MPa but the model
consistent stress units are PSI, so the Conversion Factor is supplied.
Parameter Value
Group: None
Type: None
Ultimate Tensile Strength 100.
Yield Stress 79.923103
Stress Range Intercept 453.8
Transition Point 1.0e6
Conversion Factor 145.0377
Main Index
179
CHAPTER 8
Go to the Element Properties application. Set the Action to Modify. Select the Shells property.
Note the properties defined here. All fatigue element properties are defined here. Make sure the
following are set below. Any property not mentioned should be left blank. Values for the fatigue
properties are placed on the PFTG entry. All other pertinent properties are part of the PSHELL
entry and related elements for this model (or PSOLID and related elements). Note that only
results for the top layer of the shell elements are to be returned by the fatigue analyzer.
Go to the Fields application. There should be an existing Non Spatial field that defines the
oscillation of cyclic loading (independent variable Time (t) ). Click on it and examine it. The
values make up the TABLFTG entry. If the field does not exist or does not contain all the 108 time
points, you will have to create or modify the field and enter all 108 time points and their
corresponding values per the TABLFTG in the imported input deck. Make sure the independent
variable is Time (t). If it is not, modify it to be so!
Go to the Analysis application (Action = Analyze). First make sure the subcases are set up
properly for fatigue life output. Click on the Subcases... form. Our subcases are called
AXIAL.SC1, HORIZONTAL.SC2, and VERTICAL.SC3. Click on AXIAL.SC1 from the Available
Subcases list box to access all its settings. Then open the Output Requests... form. It is best to
set this form to the advanced setting (Form Type:).
which case a FTGDEF entry is not actually needed. At this point, nothing further is needed to be
select the property sets from the top list box on the right side of the form in advanced mode.
output request.
the Apply button on the Subcases... form to store the changes the subcase.
Parameter Value
[Layer] Top
Main Index
Patran Setup
180
Still in the Analysis application, click on the existing job cant_beam101.dat to restore all its
below, use the default value or leave it blank. Close all the forms when done using the OK buttons.
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). Only the three (3)
subcases (AXIAL.SC1, HORIZONTAL.SC2, VERTICAL.SC3) should be present in the bottom list
box. Now open the Define Fatigue Load Sequences... form. On this form ensure that the loading
associations are set up properly. For the loading in this example, we want to associate the three
loads to the field defining the cyclic nature of the loading. Change the Max # of Static Load Cases
to 3 and press the Enter or Return key. This places three rows in the spreadsheet. Four events
should be create, one for each individual load, and a forth for all three loads acting simultaneously.
Each layer of the spreadsheet represents an event. For the events with only one load, leave the
other two rows blank (not filled in with any subcase or time history). Fill out the spreadsheet for
each layer as shown here if not already filled out.
Make sure you press the Enter or Return key. when entering Scale Factor and Load Magnitude
so the cells are properly filled out.
Parameter Value
Stress Units: PSI
Results Loc.: Element
Certainty of Survival (%) 50
Mean Stress Correction: Goodman
Event Name Subcase Time History
Load
Axial AXIAL.SC1 Field.99 1.0 1.192 0.0
Horizontal HORIZONTAL.SC2 Field.99 1.0 0.0119 0.0
Vertical VERTICAL.SC3 Field.99 1.0 3.261e-3 0.0
All Loads AXIAL.SC1 Field.99 3.51 1.192 0.0
HORIZONTAL.SC2 Field.99 3.51 0.0119 0.0
VERTICAL.SC3 Field.99 3.51 3.261e-3 0.0
Main Index
181
CHAPTER 8
Now define five (5) load sequences. Use the right mouse button to click on Load Sequences and
Add a New Sequence. Do this five times. Then right mouse button click on each sequence in turn
and Edit Sequence... Change the name of the sequence as listed in the table below. Do the same
to Add Event...(s) to each sequence per the table below also. The load sequence is now defined.
Data on this form defines the FTGSEQ/FTGEVNT/FTGLOAD entries. You can close the Load
Sequence form using the OK button.
Method=Result Entities. Select the cant_beam101.MASTER file and press the Apply button.
Repeats.
Step 8: Run Factor of Safety Jobs
The above set up did not run the factor of safety analysis jobs that are also set up in the original input
file. Patran will not allow you to set up all of these in a single input deck. To run the factor of safety,
using a new Job Name in the Analysis application, you need to turn ON the Factor of Safety analysis in
the Fatigue Parameters... form and change the Target Life=1000, and you will have to adjust the Scale
Factor and Load Magnitude entries in the load sequences to match those in the original input deck. All
other input remains identical.
Step 1: Create a New Job
Sequence Name Event Repeats
Axial Only Axial 1.0
Horizontal Only Horizontal 1.0
Vertical Only Vertical 1.0
All Simultaneously All Loads 1.0
All Duty Cycle Axial 1.0
Horizontal 1.0
Vertical 1.0
Main Index
Patran Setup
182
You could go about this in two different ways. You could open a new database and then import
the input deck associated with this example: cant_beam112.dat (Action=Read Input File) and
then continue to verify the model and set up and submit the fatigue analysis. However for the
purposes of this exercise, continue in the same database as the previous job using the
cant_beam101.dat as the imported input deck.
Go to the Load Cases application. Set the Action to Modify. For each of our Existing Load Cases
select them one at a time and make sure the load case Type is Time Dependent. Ensure that each
contains the following LBCs as per the table below. Modify them to be so if needed. Also you
will need to create the ALL.SC4 load case.
Note that the scale factors are applied in the load cases in this case and not defined as part of the
FTGPARM entry using the Fatigue Parameters... form. The reason for doing this is to allow us
to run all the non-factor-of-safety jobs in a single run. For the SOL 101 job we put the scale factors
right in the Load Sequence... form in order to run all fatigue analyses in a single run. For SOL
112, this is not possible on the Load Sequence... form as you will see momentarily. We could
define the scale factors in the Fatigue Parameters... form, but this would force us to run one
fatigue analysis per defined job.
Go to the Loads/BCs application. Set Action=Modify and Object=Force. Set the Current Load
Case to ALLSC4 so we can see all three forces. Select force.5 from the list box and open the
Modify Data... form. In this form only the Force <F1 F2 F3> data box should be filled out. In
addition to this, the data box just to the right of this data box must have our cyclic non-spatial time
field: Field.99. If not, select it from the Time/Freq Dependent Fields list box. (Note that
sometimes the time dependent fields are not visible unless you scroll the form or drag it over the
middle of the screen and expand it.) Press the Apply button to modify the force LBC. Repeat this
for the other two forces.
The material model and element properties are the same as for the SOL 101 job.
Step 3: Set the Job Name and Solution
Load Case Type Scale Factor Associated LBCs
AXIAL.SC1 Time Dependent 0.02077 Displ_spc1.4
Force_force.5
HORIZONTAL.SC2 Time Dependent 0.003807 Displ_spc1.4
Force_force.7
VERTICAL.SC3 Time Dependent 0.001058 Displ_spc1.4
Force_force.9
ALL.SC4 Time Dependent 0.0008873 Displ_spc1.4
Force_force.5
Force_force.7
Force_force.9
Main Index
183
CHAPTER 8
Go to the Analysis application (Action = Analyze). Change the Job Name to cant_beam112.
Open the Solution Type... form and set the Solution Type to TRANSIENT RESPONSE with
Formulation=Modal.
Step 4: Define the Fatigue Parameters
Open the Solution Parameters... form and ensure that the settings on the Results Output
Format... and Fatigue Parameters... forms are the same as they were for the SOL 101 job. The
Eigenvalue Extraction... form should have 10 set for the Number of Desired Roots (this is the
default). Close the Solution Parameters... form with the OK button.
Step 5: Define the Subcases and Output Requests
Open the Subcases... form. Each of the subcases has to be redefined for SOL 112. Do this one
subcase at a time. Select the first subcase from the top list box.
Ensure that the same request for Fatigue Life is made for at least the first of our subcases as it was
for the SOL 101 job.
Each subcase must have 108 time steps defined with a Delta-T of 1.0 and Skip Factor of 1. Do
this under the Subcase Parameters... form and then under the DEFINE TIME STEPS... form.
Make sure you do this for each subcase.
When done defining time steps and adding the fatigue output request, close the respective forms
and press the Apply button on the Subcases... form to store the changes to each subcase. Repeat
the above process for each subcase.
Step 6: Define the Cyclic Load Definition
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). Deselect anything
in the bottom list box and then select the subcases from the top list box in this order: AXIAL.SC1,
HORIZONTAL.SC2, VERTICAL.SC3, ALL.SC4.
Now open the Define Fatigue Load Sequences... form. Just like the SOL 101 setup, four events
should be create, one for each individual load, and a forth for all three loads acting
simultaneously. The difference here is that only the transient subcase needs to be selected to
define a fatigue load event. Fill out the spreadsheet for each layer as shown here if not already
filled out.
Event Name Subcase
Axial AXIAL.SC1
Horizontal HORIZONTAL.SC2
Vertical VERTICAL.SC3
All Loads ALL.SC4
Main Index
Patran Setup
184
to add events to each sequence per the table also. The load sequence is now defined. The definition
is actually identical to the SOL 101 job.
This defines the FTGSEQ entry. You can close the Load Sequence form using the OK button.
Repeats.
The above set up did not run the factor of safety analysis jobs that are also set up in the original input file.
Patran will not allow you to set up all of these in a single input deck. To run the factor of safety, you need
to turn ON the Factor of Safety analysis in the Fatigue Parameters... form and change the Target
Life=1000, and you will have to adjust the Scale Factor back to 1.0 on the Load Cases to match those in
the original input deck.
Step 1: Create a New Job
Again, you could go about this in two different ways. You could open a new database and then
import the input deck associated with this example: cant_beam103.dat (Action=Read Input File)
and then continue to verify the model and set up and submit the fatigue analysis. However for the
purposes of this exercise, continue in the same database as the previous job using the
cant_beam101.dat as the imported input deck, now with both SOL 101 and 112 jobs defined.
Horizontal 1.0
Vertical 1.0
Main Index
185
CHAPTER 8
Step 2: Prepare the Modal Responses
This SOL 103 job, in the end, will give identical results to the SOL 112 job. However, to do with
with a SOL 103 job, the external modal responses must be made available. These modal
responses could come from various different sources. For the purposes of this exercise the modal
responses are output from the SOL 112 job. To produce them do this outside of Patran:
Edit the SOL 112 input deck and add this output request above all SUBCASES and submit to
Nastran:
SDISPLACEMENT(PUNCH)=ALL
Also, if the following line exists, it is recommended that you comment it out by putting a $ in
front of it:
NASTRAN SYSTEM(316)=19
The modal responses are output to the punch file, called cant_beam112.pch. Now the challenge
is to convert these to either external DAC files or import them to Patran in the form of non-spatial
time fields. There is a utility in Patran that can convert the punch file modal responses to
individual modal response XY files that can be imported to Patran as long as only modal
responses are present in the punch file. Do the following:
Select Tools | MSC Fatigue | Main Interface (Requires that MSC Fatigue be installed) - this
simply initializes the utility
In the Patran command window, type:
fatigue_input.convert_punch(cant_beam112,)
One file, called moden.asc.01, for each modal response found (n). So for this problem there
are four subcases, each with 10 modes, therefore we get 40 files, mode1.asc.01 through
mode40.asc.01.
Go to the Fields application and create 40 Non-spatial fields, one for each of the files created
using the Import... capability on the Input Data... form by selecting each file as appropriate.
Name them modenn_axial, modenn_horizontal, modenn_vertical, modenn_all, where nn is
the mode number. Note that you have to change the CSV Import Options... to use Space as
the Value Separator. Use this table as a guide.
Subcase
Non-Spatial Field Name XY File
AXIAL.SC1 mode01_axial mode1.asc.01
mode02_axial mode2.asc.01
... ...
mode10_axial mode10.asc.01
Main Index
Patran Setup
186
Each of these are translated into individual TABLFTG entries.
Step 3: Set the Job Name and Solution
Go to the Analysis application (Action = Analyze). Change the Job Name to cant_beam103. Open
the Solution Type... form and set the Solution Type to NORMAL MODES.
Step 4: Define the Fatigue Parameters
Open the Solution Parameters... form and ensure that the settings on the Results Output
Format... and Fatigue Parameters... forms are the same as they were for the SOL 101 and SOL
112 jobs. Close the Solution Parameters... form with the OK button.
Step 5: Define the Subcases and Output Requests
Open the Subcases... form. Only one subcase needs to be define. You can use the Default subcase.
Select it and ensure that the same request for Fatigue Life is made the SOL 101 and 112 jobs. The
Subcase Parameters... form should have 10 set for the Number of Desired Roots (this is the
default).
When done, close the respective forms and press the Apply button on the Subcases... form to store
the changes to each subcase.
Step 6: Define the Cyclic Load Definition
Next open the Subcase Select... form (still part of the Analysis application). Deselect anything in
the bottom list box and then select the Default subcase from the top list box.
HORIZONTAL.SC1 mode01_horizontal mode11.asc.01
mode02_horizontal mode12.asc.01
... ...
mode10_horizontal mode20.asc.01
VERTICAL.SC1 mode01_vertical mode21.asc.01
mode02_vertical mode22.asc.01
... ...
mode10_vertical mode30.asc.01
ALL.SC1 mode01_all mode31.asc.01
mode02_all mode32.asc.01
... ...
mode10_all mode40.asc.01
Subcase
Non-Spatial Field Name XY File
Main Index
187
CHAPTER 8
On this form ensure that the loading associations are set up properly. For the loading in this
example, we want to associate each mode to its modal response for each loading event (that
correspond to the original transient response subcases). Change the Number of Modes to 10 and
press the Enter or Return key. This places 10 rows in the spreadsheet. Four events should be
create, one for each individual load, and a forth for all three loads acting simultaneously. Each
layer of the spreadsheet represents an event. Fill out the spreadsheet for each layer as shown here
if not already filled out.
Make sure you press the Enter or Return key. when entering Scale Factor and Load Magnitude
so the cells are properly filled out. Note that we are defining the scale factors in the load sequence
again as opposed to doing it as an overall fatigue parameter.
Also note that there is a toggle on the Load Sequence... form called Fill Down. If you turn this
ON, when selecting and filling in a cell in the spreadsheet, all cells in the same column will
automatically be filled in with sequentially ascending data. Give it a try to see what it does. In
cases like these, it helps fill out the form much more quickly.
Event Name Mode Number Modal Response
Load
Axial Mode no. 1 mode01_axial 1.0 0.02077 0.0
Mode no. 2 mode02_axial 1.0 0.02077 0.0
... ... ... ... ...
Mode no. 10 mode10_axial 1.0 0.02077 0.0
Horizontal Mode no. 1 mode01_horizontal 1.0 0.003807 0.0
Mode no. 2 mode02_horizontal 1.0 0.003807 0.0
... ... ... ... ...
Mode no. 10 mode10_horizontal 1.0 0.003807 0.0
Vertical Mode no. 1 mode01_vertical 1.0 0.001058 0.0
Mode no. 2 mode02_vertical 1.0 0.001058 0.0
... ... ... ... ...
Mode no. 10 mode10_vertical 1.0 0.001058 0.0
All Loads Mode no. 1 mode01_all 1.0 0.0008873 0.0
Mode no. 2 mode02_all 1.0 0.0008873 0.0
... ... ... ... ...
Mode no. 10 mode10_all 1.0 0.0008873 0.0
Main Index
Patran Setup
188
to Add Event...(s) to each sequence per the table below also. The load sequence is now defined.
The definition is actually identical to the SOL 101 and 112 jobs.
This defines the FTGSEQ/FTGEVNT/FTGLOAD entries. You can close the Load Sequence form
using the OK button.
Repeats.
The above set up did not run the factor of safety analysis jobs that are also set up in the original input file.
Patran will not allow you to set up all of these in a single input deck. To run the factor of safety, you need
to turn ON the Factor of Safety analysis in the Fatigue Parameters... form and change the Target
Life=1000, and you will have to adjust the Scale Factor back to 1.0 on the Load Cases to match those in
the original input deck.
Horizontal 1.0
Vertical 1.0
Main Index
Chapter 9: Design Optimization
9
Design Optimization
Problem Description
Fatigue Setup
Concluding Remarks
Main Index
Problem Description
190
Problem Description
This example uses a simple cantilevered plate to illustrate the fatigue optimization feature. The model is
identical to that used in the Chapter 8 of the Design Optimization Users Guide for demonstrating multi-
disciplinary analysis and design (see file dsoug3.dat in the test problem library tpl/ugdesopt). The user
should familiarize him/herself with that model first and should have basic understanding of the usage of
SOL 200, design optimization. This example is not a comprehensive illustration or explanation of setting
up, using, and debugging SOL 200 runs, but instead, is an illustration of how fatigue constraints and
objectives can be used in an optimization analysis.
Figure 9-1 Plate Thickness Design Problem
Objective
To illustrate the fatigue life optimization capability
Files Required
fat_desopt_nolife.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with no fatigue life constraint.
fat_desopt_life.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue life constraint.
fat_desopt_loglife.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue log of life constraint.
fat_desopt_eqlife.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue equivalent life constraint.
Main Index
191
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
Limitations
Before proceeding, it is expedient to understand the current limitations of fatigue optimization in SOL
200.
Fatigue responses can currently only be defined from a single load sequence. That is, DRESP1
entries can only reference one fatigue analysis (called out by the FATIGUE case control) in the
ATTB field. However, there can be as many DRESP1 entries as necessary to define the fatigue
responses as long as they all reference the same fatigue output request.
Only ANALYSIS=STATIC subcases are currently supported, although the design optimization
can still be multi-disciplinary. Only static subcases can be used to calculate fatigue responses.
Currently, only the first subcase can have fatigue constraints defined by a DESSUB case control.
As fatigue output requests are called out above the subcase level, it is recommended to use a
global constraint (DESGLB). Fatigue constraints encountered by anything other than the
DESGLB or the DESSUB from the first subcase result in an error.
Description
The objective of this exercise is to determine the optimum thickness distribution of the cantilever plate
such that structural mass is minimized. There are a number of loading conditions imposed: a tip load as
shown in the figure above and a uniform pressure, also shown. Constraints are placed on the maximum
allowable tip displacement and the von Mises stresses on the upper surface of the first row of elements
along the length of the plate. A constraint is also placed on the first natural frequency and a frequency
response analysis is performed using a tip load across a frequency range of 0.0 to 10.0 Hz with a
maximum tip displacement constraint. This is the original example. On top of this a fatigue analysis is
performed with a fatigue life constraint imposed on the same elements as the stress constraint for the tip
load. See the tables below for a summary.
fat_desopt_eqloglife.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue equivalent log of life constraint.
fat_desopt_damage.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue damage constraint.
fat_desopt_logdamage.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue log of damage constraint.
fat_desopt_fos.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue safety factor constraint.
fat_desopt_obj.dat Modified dsoug3.dat file with fatigue life objective.
saesus.mod External file describing cyclic loading conditions for subcase 2.
saetrn.mod External file describing cyclic loading conditions for subcase 1.
Main Index
Problem Description
192
Table 9-2 Analysis Model Description (2 x 8 array of CQUAD4 elements)
Table 9-3 Design Model Description
Material: E = 10.0E+6 psi
UTS = 58,015 psi
SRI1 = 137,350 psi
b1 = -0.076
Nc1 = 5.0E+8 cycles
b2 = 0.0
Nfc = 1.3E+30 cycles
R = -1
Se = 0.1
Two static structural analyses:
Tip Load: Two 500 lb. loads in -z direction
Pressure Load: Uniform at 7.5 lb./in
2
One normal modes analysis
One modal frequency analysis:
Tip Load: Two 50 lb. loads in z-direction
Structural damping: 10%
One fatigue analysis: Tip load cyclic variation
Objective: Structural weight minimization
Design variables: Basis functions*: constant, linear and quadratic in x direction to
describe plate element thicknesses
*The eight individual plate thicknesses (one for each station along the length of the plate) are
functions of three independent variables o
1
, o
2
, and o
3
. For a description of the reduced basis
functions used, please see the original problem in Chapter 8 of the Design Optimization Users
Guide.
Constraints:
ANALYSIS = STATICS Tip displacement s 2.0 inches
von Mises stress s 29 ksi
ANALYSIS = MODES First natural frequency > 1.5 Hz
ANALYSIS = MFREQ Magnitude of tip displacement s 2.0 inches
FATIGUE = 101: 100,000 repeats of a cyclic tip load application
Main Index
193
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
Fatigue Setup
Portions of the input deck for the fatigue optimization are shown and described below, starting with the
case control:
SOL 200
CEND
$
TITLE = Cantilever Plate NEF Model - Design Optimization
$
FATIGUE = 101
$
SPC = 100
DISP(PLOT) = ALL
STRESS(PLOT) = ALL
DESOBJ(MIN) = 35 $ OBJECTIVE FUNCTION DEFINITION
DESGLB = 99 $ GLOBAL FATIGUE CONSTRAINT
SUBCASE 1
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SUBTITLE = LOAD CONDITION 1
LOAD = 300
DESSUB = 10
SUBCASE 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SUBTITLE = LOAD CONDITION 2
LOAD = 310
DESSUB = 10
SUBCASE 3
ANALYSIS = MODES
SUBTITLE = NORMAL MODES ANALYSIS
STRESS(PLOT) = NONE
METHOD = 100
DESSUB = 30
SUBCASE 4
ANALYSIS = MFREQ
METHOD = 100
SET 100 = 9,19,29
DISP(PLOT,PHASE,SORT2) = 100
STRESS(PLOT) = NONE
SUBTITLE = MODAL FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
LOADSET = 2000
DLOAD = 1000
DESSUB = 40
FREQ = 1000
$
BEGIN BULK
Case Control
The objective function is called out by DESOBJ(MIN)=35, defining the minimization of the weight.
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
194
The design optimization case control contains four subcases that define the design task. Subcases 1 and
2 perform static analysis and impose different load conditions while sharing the imposed tip displacement
and stress design constraints (DESSUB=10). Subcase 3 performs a normal modes analysis with
METHOD=100 identifying the EIGRL bulk data entry that specifies the eigenvalue requests, while the
DESSUB=30 points to the DCONSTR entry that imposes a limit on the first natural frequency. Subcase
4 performs a modal frequency response analysis (ANALYSIS=MFREQ) and uses the same
METHOD=100 specification for the eigenanalysis. For the 4th subcase, the PHASE part of the
DISP(PHASE,SORT2)=100 acts to signify that the magnitude/phase representations is to be used, not
only in the printed and stored results, but also for the FRDISP request on DRESP1 ID=230. The SORT2
request and the 100 have no effect on the design response.
The FATIGUE=101 indicates that bulk data entries FTGDEF, FTGPARM, and FTGLOAD=101 are to be
used in a fatigue analysis. A fatigue constraint is imposed on a global level using the DESGLB=99,
calling out a DCONSTR entry containing the fatigue constraint.
The material model is defined in the bulk data as shown. The MATFTG entry that corresponds to the
MAT1 entry defines the stress-life (S-N) curve for this material. Please refer to previous chapters and
examples for explanations of the S-N curve.
MAT1 51 1.0E+7 0.33 0.1
50000. 50000. 29000.
MATFTG 51 145.0377
STATIC 307.692 400.0 100 -1.0 0.1
SN 947.0 -0.07606 5.0e8 0.0 1.0e30
The fatigue analysis is defined for the elements of the PSHELL entries as shown here with default fatigue
properties. Again please refer to previous chapters and examples for explanations of the FTGDEF and
PFTG entries.
SET4 1 PROP PSHELL 1 THRU 8
FTGDEF 101
ELSET 1 999
PFTG 999 0
Fatigue Parameters
The fatigue analysis is defined as a Total Life or Stress-Life (S-N) analysis. Detailed explanations have
been given in the previous chapters. Note that the stress units of this model are defined as PSI on the
DTI,UNITS entry for the fatigue analysis. This is required input.
FTGPARM 101 SN 1.000 4
STRESS GOODMAN ELEM
DTI UNITS 1 PSI
Main Index
195
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
Cyclic Loading
For the fatigue analysis, the following is defined for the cyclic loading of the tip load in subcase 1.
Subcase 2 is not considered in the fatigue analysis. However the cyclic loading could have been any
combination of static subcases, each with its own cyclic load definition, including multiple events
making up a duty cycle. Detailed example of more complicated cyclic loading is provided in the previous
chapters. In this example, the cyclic loading is defined by the contents of an external (DAC formatted)
file. One thousand repeats of the cyclic loading is defined as an equivalent fatigue life unit of Laps.
FTGLOAD 101 98 1 1000.0 7.883 0.0 DB
UNITS 1000. Laps
$
UDNAME 98
./saetrn.mod
Design Model
The design model consists of the design variables and their relationships to the thicknesses defined on
the PSHELL entries as explained in Chapter 8 in the Design Optimization Users Guide.
DESVAR 10 ALPH1 1.0
DESVAR 20 ALPH2 1.0
DESVAR 30 ALPH3 1.0$
$
DVPREL1 1 PSHELL 1 T
10 1.0 20 1.000 30 1.0
10 1.0 20 0.875 30 0.7656
10 1.0 20 0.750 30 0.5625
10 1.0 20 0.625 30 0.3906
10 1.0 20 0.500 30 0.250
10 1.0 20 0.375 30 0.1406
10 1.0 20 0.250 30 0.0625
10 1.0 20 0.125 30 0.0156
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
196
The responses are as shown from the original example with the new fatigue life response highlighted.
The response label is simply defined as LIFE, and the response type (RTYPE field) is set to FATIGUE.
The same elements are called out in the ATTi fields as for the stress response. Item code 4 in field ATTA
specifies fatigue life in Repeats of the cyclic loading as the response of interest. The ATTB field, set to
101, specifies that fatigue loading sequence 101 called out from the FATIGUE case control with
corresponding FTGLOAD entry is the fatigue analysis from which to compute life responses for this
optimization run.
$===================================================================
$$$... Fatigue "life" responses:
DRESP1 22 LIFE FATIGUE ELEM 4 101 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
DSCREEN FATIGUE -100.0
$===================================================================
$
$$$... Static von Mises stresses:
DRESP1 2 S12 STRESS ELEM 9 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
$
$$$... Static displacement at tip:
DRESP1 33 D1 DISP 3 19
$
$$$... 1st natural frequency
DRESP1 130 FFREQ FREQ 1
$
$$$... Frequency response tip displacement:
DRESP1 230 TDISP FRDISP 3 19
Notice the DSCREEN entry above. The design optimization process screens the constraints (filters them)
to eliminate them from the optimization process if they are determined not to be contributing to the
design. It does this to reduce the number of constraints to obtain more reasonable computational
efficiency. The DSCREEN entry forces the optimization process to retain the listed responses. This is
done for illustration purposes for this example to see all the fatigue constraints. It is typically not
necessary to use this entry. It can be eliminated but likely will result in more design cycles to converge
on an optimized design as the process is iterative and may bounce back and forth around a constraint if
one is violated.
The design objective is to minimize weight and the corresponding response objective is defined as
follows and is called out by the DESOBJ(MIN)=35 case control:
$$$... Weight response objective function:
DRESP1 35 W WEIGHT
The constraints are as shown from the original example with the new fatigue life constraint highlighted.
The fatigue constraint is set to a lower bound of 100,000 Repeats of the cyclic loading defined by
DRESP1 of ID 22, which references fatigue analysis 101.
$===================================================================
$$$... Fatigue Life Constraint (Repeats):
DCONSTR 99 22 1.0+5
$===================================================================
$
Main Index
197
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
$$$... Stress constraint:
DCONSTR 10 2 -29000. 29000.
$
$$$... Tip displacement constraint:
DCONSTR 10 33 -2. 2.
$
$$$... Normal modes 1st mode frequency constraint:
DCONSTR 30 130 1.5
$
$$$... Frequency response tip displacement constraint:
DCONSTR 40 230 2.0
Fatigue Results
Run the fat_desopt_nolife.dat and fat_desopt_life.dat files using a supported version of MSC Nastran
(>2013). Then inspect the f06 files. The first input deck runs the fatigue analysis for the initial and final
designs but does not impose the fatigue constraint on the design. The fatigue life on the critical element
(5) of the initial design is approximately one million Repeats of the cyclic loading (or one billion Laps).
With the final design however, the fatigue life is unacceptable. In fact, there is no fatigue life. The weight
is significantly reduced by more than 50%, but it breaks in less than one Repeat of the cyclic loading.
The second input deck imposes the fatigue life constraint. As one would expect, the weight reduction is
far less, but the plate retains a fatigue life of at least 100,000 Repeats or 100 million Laps. But only about
a 10% reduction in weight is obtained.
Other input decks show the use of other fatigue item codes. These are, including the one that was just
examined:
Life (in Repeats of the cyclic loading) = 4
Log of Life (in Repeats of the cyclic loading) = 5
Equivalent Life (in Laps in this case) = 6
Log of Equivalent Life (in Laps in this case) = 7
Damage = 8
Log of Damage = 9
Safety Factor = 10
The input to consider any of these is simply a change in the item code (see Table 2-8 and Table 2-9) on
the DRESP1 entry (ATTA field) and corresponding constraint. The equivalent constraint for each is
shown:
Life Response/Constraint (100,000 Repeats lower bound)
DRESP1 22 LIFE FATIGUE ELEM 4 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 1.0+5
Log of Life Response/Constraint (100,000 Repeats lower bound)
DRESP1 22 LOGLIFE FATIGUE ELEM 5 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 5.0
Main Index
Fatigue Setup
198
Equivalent Life Response/Constraint (100 Million Laps lower bound)
DRESP1 22 LAPS FATIGUE ELEM 6 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 1.0+8
Log of Life Response/Constraint (100 Million Laps lower bound)
DRESP1 22 LOGLAPS FATIGUE ELEM 7 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 8.0
Log of Damage Response/Constraint (0.00001 lower bound)
DRESP1 22 LOGDMG FATIGUE ELEM 9 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 -5.0
Using any of the above response/constraint combinations in this example should give approximately the
same design in the end. Why? Because they are all basically the same constraint. Numerically, due to the
iterative nature of design optimization, small differences will occur, but the final designs should be close.
The exception to this is damage and safety factor.
Damage Response/Constraint (0.00001 upper bound)
DRESP1 22 DAMAGE FATIGUE ELEM 8 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 1.0-5
Using damage as a fatigue constraint (or objective) should be avoided because damage is typically a very
small number and causes numerical instability in an optimization procedure. The optimization parameter
GSCAL on the DOPTPRM entry can be used to scale the constraint to avoid small bounds but this is also
discouraged. Instead the response should be recast in a form that avoids small bounds by using a DRESP2
entry (for instance by taking its reciprocal to turn it into a life value). But the best is to use the log of
damage (or life or log of life), thus avoiding any of the previously mentioned techniques.
Safety Factor Response/Constraint (1.0 lower bound)
FTGPARM 101 SN 1.000 4
STRESS GOODMAN ELEM
FOS LIFE 1.0+8 0.0101 20
...
DRESP1 22 FOS FATIGUE ELEM 12 101 1 ...
DCONSTR 99 22 1.0
The safety factor response is not something that can be directly compared to the life and damage
response/constraints. In this example we have a model that has finite life at most of the elements of
interest. Thus using a life constraint makes the most sense. The scale factors determined during a factor
of safety (FOS) analysis are determined through an iterative process to keep the life at all elements of
interest at a prescribed target. The resulting scale factors tell you what the resulting cyclic stresses need
to be scaled by to attain the target life at any particular element. If this example were exhibiting infinite
life at all the elements upon initial design, using a safety factor response/constraint would be appropriate
to ensure the factors remain above a Fail Safe level, as a fatigue life optimization would be impossible.
In this example, the target life of the FOS analysis is set to the fatigue life constraint of 100 million Laps.
The actual constraint is set to a scale factor of 1.0 such that all elements just attain the target life.
The results off each run is shown in Figure 9-2 and Figure 9-3.
Main Index
199
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
Figure 9-2 Final Thicknesses of each PSHELL Property
Figure 9-3 Weight by Design Cycle for each Item Code
Note: Life, Log of Life, Eqiuvalent Life, and Log of Equivalent Life, and Log of Damge curves
overlap each other as they all give mostly identical results.
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
200
Concluding Remarks
Optimization using fatigue responses is a powerful feature. However, some things to be aware of with
design optimization and fatigue are:
If the initial design has zero fatigue life, changing the design will still have zero fatigue life, so
the optimizer cannot make progress. A related issue is that if the design has infinite fatigue life
and the user wants fatigue response to be critical, changing the design will not have any affect
and the optimizer cannot make progress. The initial design should have some reasonable damage
below static failure, but not infinite life, in order for the optimizer to make progress.
If an initial design has infinite life, optimizing on safety factor is an alternative.
Optimizing using damage constraints should be avoided as damage is typically a very small
number and may even be below the change limit tolerance, thus making the optimization process
think it has already converged. Use log of damage instead.
Sometimes fatigue constraints may be violated with only small perturbation to the design. In any
design cycle, the design values may be reduced in an amount that the fatigue constraints change
from a feasible design to violated constraints (when fatigue constraints are not retained). It may
report that the gradient of the violated fatigue constraints are zero. This is because the minimum
life value reported is 0.5. So when SOL200 perturbs the design variables, the analyzer always
gives fatigue life of 0.5. Thus, the fatigue life is zero. Since the fatigue life is a violated
constraint and its gradients are zero, the optimizer must stop since the optimizer does not know
how to correct the violated constraints. To overcome this problem, there are two ways:
Adding DSCREEN, FATIGUE,-1.+2, thus the SOL200 will retain the fatigue life constraints.
The design variables will not change significantly unlike the unconstrained optimization
without DSCREEN. If a constrain<-0.5, it will not be retained in the next optimization cycle
by default. So setting the truncation threshold (TRS) field of DSCREEN to a larger negative
number helps ensure the constraints are retained.
Modify DOPTPRM DELX=0.1. The DELX has a default=0.5 that will allow design variables
to change up to 50% in next design cycle. DOPTPRM DELX=0.1 will allow design variables
to change up to 10% in next design cycle. Thus, this can be employed to avoid the above issue
of too much change and zero gradients.
This example used element centroidal fatigue responses for optimization, which is appropriate
for shell or surface type element. For solid elements, nodal must be used (LOC=NODE on
FTGPARM). There are two disadvantages of using nodal results:
Currently, averaged grid stress due to contributions from each shared element for fatigue
analysis are not used. This results in element nodal fatigue results.
Obviously, NODE will result in more constraints. Note that if it is desired to use life from all
four nodes of a particular 4-noded element, item codes 4, 15, 26, and 37 are required.
Main Index
201
CHAPTER 9
Design Optimization
Design Objective
If the objective is to minimize/maximize fatigue life or damage, currently only static subcases can be
present in the input deck. Multi-disciplinary optimization in not possible. The input deck
fat_desopt_obj.dat is an example of maximizing the fatigue life. The DESOBJ case control points to a
DRESP1 entry of a fatigue response on a single element. The physical and design model are otherwise
identical to all the other optimization runs in this exercise. The fatigue constraint has been removed and
the weight objective replaced with an objective to maximize the fatigue life on the critical element (5).
If you run the deck and inspect the output you will see that convergence is obtained in only three design
cycles. The fatigue life quickly becomes infinite. Conversely if you replace DESOBJ(MAX) with
DESOBJ(MIN) to minimize the design life and rerun the problem you will also see that the problem
converges in very few design cycles. In this case the life quickly becomes zero. What this means in both
cases is that the problem is not bounded sufficiently to converge on a finite life in either case. So keep
this in mind when trying to use fatigue life or damage as the objective. More bounded constraints and
design limits on design variables need to be imposed on this model to converge on a finite life.
Main Index
Concluding Remarks
202
Main Index
Ap. A: Utilities
A
Utilities
Overview
Descriptions
Main Index
Overview
2
Overview
Various utilities are delivered with MSC Nastran that a fatigue analyst should find useful, mostly for
manipulating and viewing standard DAC formatted cyclic loading files that are used with MSC Nastran
Embedded Fatigue analysis. The utilities are broken up into the following catagories.
Material Management
Loading Manipulation
Graphical Display
File Conversion
A brief description of each utility is given in this Appendix. These are the same utilities that are available
in MSC Fatigue. For full details of each modules operation, see the MSC.Fatigue Users Guide and/or
the MSC Fatigue Quick Start Guide.
To invoke any of these modules, you must set the P3FPATH environment variable to point to the
directory location of these modules. For example
Windows:
c:\> set P3FPATH=c:\MSC.Software\MSC_Nastran\20xxy\msc20xxy\util
Linux (cshell shown):
setenv P3FPATH=/MSC.Software/MSC_Nastran/20xxy/msc20xxy/util
where xxy is the year/version of the software. Then invoke the desired module, ptime as an example,
by issuing the command (in lower case letters):
Windows:
c:\> %P3FPATH%\bin\ptime
Linux (cshell shown):
> $P3FPATH/bin/ptime
Or if you have P3FPATH defined in your file search path, you should be able to just invoke a module by
typing its name from the command prompt. The environment variable still needs to be set though, for
proper operation.
Main Index
3
APPENDIX A
Utilities
Descriptions
For full descriptions of each utilities capabilities, please see the MSC.Fatigue Users Guide and/or the
MSC Fatigue Quick Start Guide.
Material Management
Loading Manipulation
Module Description
PFMAT
Material Database
PFMAT contains a user expandable database of many fatigue material
datasets that can be view both tabularly and graphically.
Module Description
PTIME
Loading Database
PTIME is a utility that allows one to manager DAC time history files in
a given directory and quickly create, modify, and/or graphically display
them.
MART
Arithmetic Manipulation
MART is a module which arithmetically manipulates standard loading
data files. Files may be operated on in ways similar to that offered by a
hand held calculator. Complex mathematical procedures can be built up
by chaining together sets of MART commands. If necessary, the
arithmetic manipulation can be applied to a section or window in the
data file, leaving the remainder of the data unaffected.
MCOE
Multi-Channel Editor
MCOE is an interactive alphanumeric editor that allows both the
creation of new and the editing of existing time series data files. MCOE
operates within a highly featured spreadsheet environment that allows
data to be manipulated within the spreadsheet (points inserted, moved,
etc.).
MCYC
Rainflow Cycle Counter
MCYC is used to process a time series signal by extracting fatigue
cycles according to the rainflow cycle counting algorithm. MCYC is
useful because it allows the user to count cycles using the same
parameters for comparing and assessing various time signals.
MFRM
Formula Processor
MFRM is an arithmetic and logical module which can be used to process
formulae of varying complexity.
MLEN
File Cut and Past
MLEN is used to extract a portion of data from one file or several files,
and load the extracted portions into a new output file. It can be used to
concatenate (merge), individual data sets into a single output file. It can
also be used to delete a selected portion of data from files.
Main Index
Descriptions
4
MMFM
Multi-File Manipulation
MMFM is an arithmetic and logical module which can be used to
process formulae of varying complexity. The formulae themselves are
defined by means of a command language which MMFM interprets and
executes. The command language is, in effect, a simple programming
language that gives users access to all parts of loading files, i.e. header,
data area, and extra details keywords.
MPVXMUL
Peak-Valley Extraction
MPVXMUL extracts turning points from single parameter files such as
.dac and RPC multiple data - channel files. The MPVXMUL extraction
process maintains synchronous phase by writing corresponding data
values to all the output files whenever a turning point is found in any
channel.
MSIMMAX
Simultaneous Values
Analysis (DAC/RPC)
MSIMMAX performs simultaneous values analysis on either multi-
channels in a single RPC file or multiple DAC files from the same test.
MADA
Amplitude Distribution
MADA calculates the probability density distribution and other function
of a time signal.
MASD
Auto Spectral Distribution
MASD performs a frequency analysis of a time signal to determine
frequency content.
MFFF
Fast Fourier Filter
MFFF creates a finite impulse response (FIR), filter by using the
window method. After creation, MFFF automatically removes
unwanted frequency components from time series data. High-pass, low-
pass, band-pass or band-reject can be created.
MBFL
Butter Worth Filter
This program takes a signal file and passes it through a Butterworth filter
to produce an output signal file. The filter characteristic can be a low
pass, high pass, band pass or band-stop. The filter order can be from 1
to 8 poles which will give a cutoff of between 6db and 48db per octave.
MFRA
Frequency Response
Analysis
The frequency response analysis, MFRA, analyses the response of a
single input, single output linear system. Six files of statistics are
generated as a result of this analysis including the cross-correlation.
MRSTAT
Statistical Analysis
MRSTATS analyses a time signal and produces a number of statistics
about that signal. RSTATS works by breaking the input time signal into
segments, and statistically analyzing each segment. Each statistic is fed
into an output signal file.
Module Description
Main Index
5
APPENDIX A
Utilities
Graphical Display
MFILMNP
Header/Footer
Manipulation
File manipulation (MFILMNP) allows both header and extra details
manipulation. In addition it can check that a header conforms to
MSC.Fatigue conventions. MFILMNP can list and edit data file headers,
and control the extra details data that can be written to files. The files
types that can be edited include single parameter files e.g. .dac files and
2 parameter files e.g. .mdf. Three parameter histogram files can also be
processed.
MCDA
Cycle and Damage
Analysis
MCDA calculates and displays cycles and damage distributions so that
different test conditions may be compared and the reasons for variations
in fatigue damage may be determined. Displays may be as histograms,
continuous curves, or exceedance plots.
MCYL
Cycles File Lister
MCYL is used to numerically list the contents of a histogram or cycle
file. MCYL can also display a summary of the information resident in
the file header region. MCYL also accesses the cycle results files
generated by the MSC.Fatigue fatigue analyzers FEFAT, MCLF and
MSLFMSLF and create a rainflow matrix of cycles according to user
specified engineering units and limits.
Module Description
MGED
Graphical Editing
MGED is the multi-channel interactive graphical editor for time series
data allowing online manipulation of a signal.
MMFD
Multi-File Display
MMFD displays single parameter data files.
MQLD
Quick Look Display
MQLD displays single channel data files.
MTPD
Two Parameter Display
MTPD displays paired (X-Y) data files. For .mdf files.
MPOD
Polar Display
MPOD displays paired (X-Y) data files. For .pod files.
Module Description
Main Index
Descriptions
6
File Conversion
MP3D
3D Display
MP3D is a histogram and waterfall display module.
MWFLCRE
Waterfall File Create
WFLCRE creates a three parameter waterfall file from multiple single
parameter files.
Module Description
MDTA/MATD
Binary/ASCII Converters
The signal to ASCII module, MDTA, converts a single parameter, X-Y,
or histogram binary file into ASCII format. It can also write or omit
header details, and write an ASCII file as single or multiple column.
MDTA is complimentary to module PTIME which converts ASCII files
to binary files. The MADT module also converts ASCII files to binary,
operates in batch mode, and converts multi-channel data to multi-files
automatically.
MREGEN
Signal Regeneration
MREGEN can regenerate a single parameter signal file (.dac
extension) from a three parameter range-mean cycles histogram file
(.cyg type), regenerate a single parameter signal file (.dac extension)
from a three parameter maximum-minimum cycles histogram file (.cyh
type), regenerate a single parameter signal file (.dac extension) from a
three parameter Markov Matrix (.mkh type), and generate a Gaussian
series from a user supplied irregularity factor and save it as a .dac file.
MREMDAC
MDACREM
RPC to DAC and
DAC to RPC converter
This program extracts channels of data from MTS RPC
tm
remote
parameter (RPC) files, and creates a single .dac file for each channel of
the RPC file. It is possible to selectively extract one or more channel
numbers. A time window within the RPC file may be selected which will
apply to all channels extracted. Both RPC II and RPC III files may be
processed. Full details of the extraction and creation process can be
saved to a report file. The reverse of this is MDACREM.
MWFLCRE
Waterfall File Create
WFLCRE creates a three parameter waterfall file from multiple single
parameter files.
Module Description
Main Index
7
APPENDIX A
Utilities
Batch Operation
All the above utilities can be run in batch mode. For example, to run the MART utility in batch you can
type something like:
mart /opt=l/inp=test/out=test1/ov=y/mul=10.1/con=-123
In this example, MART will process an input data file called test.dac by multiplying every value
contained therein by 10.1 and then subtracting 123 from the result. The output will be written to another
data file called test1.dac. If a file with this name already exists then it will be overwritten.
Batch keywords for each utility can be listed by using the help button when running each module
graphically in its main form and are also listed in the MSC.Fatigue Users Guide.
Main Index
Descriptions
8
Main Index
Ap. B: Glossary of Terms
B
Glossary of Terms
Glossary of Terms
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
10
Glossary of Terms
Amplitude
Amplitude is half of the range of a cycle. It is the maximum less the minimum divided by two.
August Woehler
Note: The terms and definitions in this appendix may have multiple meanings to different people.
The definitions give here are as used in the context of this guide.
Main Index
11
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
This German gentleman is probably the most famous of all fatigue researchers being the Father of
Fatigue as many know him. He is responsible for the invention of the stress-life or S-N method of
fatigue life prediction. See glossary term Stress-Life (S-N).
|-Solution
See glossary term Compliance Function.
Bastenaire
This is another representation of the S-N or stress-life curve.
Based upon the analysis of thousands of tests carried out on different steels, Bastenaire proposed in 1974
a general formulation of the Stress Life curve:
The four parameters A, B, C and E
B
are derived from material raw data. If C > 1, the SN curve has an
inflexion point. If C = 0, the model simplifies to the Stromeyer formulation N = A/(S-E) (with a factor
of e).
N
A
S E
B
----------------
S E
B
B
----------------
\ .
| |
C
exp =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
12
The Bastenaire formula aims to correctly describe the whole endurance domain and the parameter
calculation takes into account all tested specimens, including the run-outs.
Bastenaire curves can also be modified to calculate lives at any certainty of survival, using a scatter factor
and the normal distribution law (the assumption is made that the stresses are normally distributed for a
specified life):
sd: scatter factor, estimation of the standard deviation on stress
m: number of standard deviations from the mean value, defines the required probability
and is given by the normal law tables.
Below are given example formulas for 84%, 50% and 16% certainty of survival:
Biaxial - Biaxiality Ratio
For surface resolved stresses the two major principal stresses lie in the plane of the surface with the third
principal stress being zero (normal to the surface). The principal stresses therefore, correspond to the X,
Y, and Z=0 component stresses. The ratio of the minimum in-plane stress divided by the maximum in-
plane stress defines the biaxiality ratio. This ratio can take on any number between -1 and 1. Zero
indicates a uniaxial state of stress with only one principal stress being non-zero.
Broad Band
See glossary term Wide Band.
Certainty of Survival
SE, the standard error of log
10
(N), is used to adjust the life/damage predicted to any given probability of
survival. Fatigue life always includes some scatter, and at any given level of stress range, the distribution
of fatigue lives is assumed to be a log-normal distribution, that is, a Normal or Gauss distribution of the
logarithm of the fatigue life.
The Gauss distribution defines the probability density function of a value x as:
N
p%
A
S m
-
sd E
B
( )
------------------------------------------
S m
-
sd E
B
( )
B
------------------------------------------
\ .
| |
C
exp =
N
84%
A
S sd E
B
+ ( )
-----------------------------------
S sd E
B
+
B
-----------------------------
\ .
| |
C
exp =
N
50%
A
S E
B
( )
---------------------
S E
B
B
----------------
\ .
| |
C
exp =
N
16%
A
S sd E
B
+ ( )
-----------------------------------
S sd E
B
+
B
-----------------------------
\ .
| |
C
exp =
Main Index
13
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
and the cumulative probability of x as:
When applying this to fatigue calculations:
x is replaced by log
10
(N) where N is the fatigue life in cycles.
is replaced by log
10
(N
50
) where N
50
is the number of cycles at which 50% of tested specimens
are predicted to fail.
o is the standard error of log
10
(N) associated with the S-N curve (obtained from linear
regression of the original test data SE in the material database).
In practice, if we want to make a life or damage prediction based upon a particular percentage probability
of survival, we use a lookup table to determine the deviation from the mean (50%) life in terms of the
number of standard errors.
Table 2-1 Lookup Table for Certainty of Survival
Number of SDs from mean % Certainty of survival
-3.0 99.9
-2.5 99.4
-2.0 97.7
-1.5 93.0
-1.0 84.0
-0.5 69.0
0.0 50.0
0.5 31.0
1.0 16.0
| x ( )
1
o 2t
--------------- e
x ( )
2
2o
2
---------------------
=
u x ( )
1
2
--- 1 erf
x
o 2
------------ -
\ .
| |
+
\ .
| |
=
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
14
For example, if the standard error is 0.1,creating a calculation with 97.7% certainty of survival
corresponds to -2 standard errors. Therefore:

In the case of a strain-life curve, if a design criterion of 97.7% is desired, z = -2, the strain-life curve is
then shifted downwards as follows:
Combination Method
See glossary terms Stress Combination or Strain Combination.
1.5 6.7
2.0 2.3
2.5 0.6
3.0 0.1
Table 2-1 Lookup Table for Certainty of Survival
Number of SDs from mean % Certainty of survival
log
10
N
10
N
50
0.2 log =
N N
50
10
0.2
=
c
a
o
f
'
E
------- 2N
f
( )
b
10
zSEe
c
f
' 2N
f
( )
c
+ 10
zSEp
=
Main Index
15
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Compliance Function
For crack growth analysis, a compliance function needs to be defined. This is also known as a |-function
or a K-solution. It is defined based on the crack geometry and the dimension of the specimen. In physical
terms it is simply a measure of how the compliance (stiffness or flexibility) of the structure changes as
the crack propagates. These functions take on the form of look up tables in the software and can be
defined in terms of a polynomial equation or selected from a standard library set. They are then used in
the crack growth rate (Paris) equation to determine the stress intensity for any given stress cycle and, in
turn, used to determine a incremental crack size.
Component S-N
This is an S-N curve which is tied to a specific component geometry and relates nominal stress (S) to
life. The stress that is looked up on the S-N curve is not the actual stress at the failure location (in general)
but the stress as measured in a location away from the failure. This is usually because of the
impracticality of placing a strain gauge at the failure location. The S-N curve can only be used for
components with the same geometry (and material) as that used to create the S-N curve. The components
themselves are used as test specimens to create the S-N curves (such as a weld class). These types of S-
N curves are not used to identify the location of a possible fatigue failure since this location is already
identified by the nature of the S-N curve. Instead they are used to evaluate resistance to variation of the
loading. These S-N curves are generally used when the failure mechanism is not well modeled with
material S-N curves or other methods. They represent a more macro way of characterizing the failure
mechanism by building into the curve all influences on the fatigue life, i.e., plasticity, geometry, residual
stress, etc. The challenge when using these S-N curves with FE analysis is to know where the measured
or reference location is, which is the stress that should be used to look up damage using these S-N curves.
Crack Initiation
See glossary term Strain-Life (e-N).
Crack Growth (Propagation)
See glossary term LEFM.
da
dN
------- C AK ( )
m
Paris Equation =
AK Yo ta Stress Intensity =
Compliance Function
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
16
Critical Plane Analysis
The principal stress tensor axis can rotate from time step to time step when subject to multiple load inputs.
A fatigue analysis done at various angles is said to be a critical plane analysis. The plane that exhibits the
most damage is said to be the critical plane. These types of analyses are typically illustrated using a polar
plot of damage versus angle.
Cycles (cycle counting)
A stress or strain cycle is one event that may or may not cause damage. A single constant amplitude, fully
reversed sine or triangle wave that passes upwards positively through its mean will register a stress cycle
each time. Many methods of counting cycles in a randomly varying signal have been adopted and
abandoned over the years. The rainflow cycle counting method is the most widely accepted. Another way
to understand cycle counting is illustrated by the diagram where a portion of a time signal is stood on end
and then each point is mapped onto stress-strain space. This simulates loading and unloading where the
material may yield producing a hysteresis loop. Each loop represents one stress cycle. Cycles with
noticeable inner area are damaging and cycles which appear as straight lines are purely elastic and cause
no damage. For any time varying load, all cycles will fall with in one outer, large cycle representative of
Main Index
17
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
the maximum and minimum of the signal. So in short, cycle counting counts the number of hysteresis
loops and keeps track of their range/mean or maximum/minimum values.
The basic method has the following steps (assume we are looking at a stress history):
1. Reduce the stress time history to a series of turning points (maxima and minima):
2. Cycles are identified by considering four (4) points at a time. The logic is as follows:
If point n is a maximum, IF S
n
S
n-2
AND S
n-1
S
n-3
then S
n-2
and S
n-1
make a cycle that can be
extracted from the sequence.
If point n is a minimum, IF S
n
S
n-2
AND S
n-1
S
n-3
then S
n-2
and S
n-1
make a cycle that can be
extracted from the sequence.
After this logic has been applied to the whole sequence, any remaining points are known as the
residual.
This is illustrated below:
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
18
Two cycles are extracted from the sequence, represented by points 2 and 3 and by points 5 and 6.
The remaining turning points, 1, 4 and 7 form the residual. (In the trivial case where the history
contains only 2 or 3 points, there will be only 1 obvious cycle and no residual.)
3. Finally, the residual may be closed down. This is done by re-ordering the points to start from the
point with the largest absolute value, and repeating this point at the end. Steps 1 and 2 are then
repeated. In this case, point 7 is no longer a turning point, so we are left with the trivial case with
only 3 points.
The end result of cycle counting is a list of cycles. For example, the case illustrated gives:
Main Index
19
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Note that if you start cycle counting a stress time history starting from the absolute maximum value, all
cycles will close, that is, there will be no residual.
The following values associated with each cycle may be used in subsequent fatigue calculations:
Max the maximum value of the cycle
Min the minimum value of the cycle
The range of stress (Max Min)
The amplitude half the range
The mean stress (Max + Min)/2
The load ratio or stress ratio R, Min/Max
Rainflow cycle counting for the local strain (c-N) approach is based on the same principles as for the S-
N method, but there are additional requirements in that we need to know the total (elastic-plastic) strain
range for each cycle, together with its mean or maximum stress.
Consider the case of a simple bar, subjected to a variable amplitude loading under uniaxial conditions,
and suppose we can determine the total strain and stress histories. If we plot stress against strain, the
stress-strain history will appear as a number of nested hysteresis loops, each corresponding to a rainflow
cycle, as illustrated.
Cycle number Max value Min value
1 S
2
S
3
2 S
6
S
5
3 S
4
S
1
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
20
Each excursion takes the shape of part of the hysteresis curve.
Starting at point 1, we follow the hysteresis curve as far as point 2. At this point the strain direction
reverses, so we start again from point 2 up to 3, and from point 3 we reset to the beginning of the
hysteresis curve again until point 4. 2-3-4 represents a closed rainflow cycle. At point 4, the well-known
material memory effect has to be considered. The material appears to remember that it was interrupted
after starting from point 1, so when it gets to point 4 it resumes along the hysteresis curve starting from
1 until it reaches the next turning point at 5.
By continuing in this way, we will find that the entire history can be tracked and reduced to a number of
hysteresis loops that can be identified with rainflow cycles. For each cycle, we can determine the
important parameters we need for a fatigue calculation, namely the strain range and mean or maximum
stress.
However, FE-based c-N fatigue calculations are very often based on elastic FE results, so that the
equivalent strain history generated by the c-N analysis engine based on the load provider is a pseudo-
elastic strain history. In reality, there may be plasticity, especially at critical locations, and this needs to
be estimated if realistic life predictions are to be obtained. In addition, the stress state may not be uniaxial.
In these circumstances, the tracking rainflow cycle counting procedure has to be modified to include a
notch correction procedure such as the Neuber or Hoffmann-Seeger methods, to estimate the total strain
range of each cycle, and to allow the resulting hysteresis loops to be correctly positioned.
The steps in the calculation are as follows:
1. Reduce the elastic strain history to a peak-valley sequence, and re-order it to start from the Abs
Max value, with the first point repeated at the end.
2. Position this point in stress-strain space using the cyclic stress strain curve and using a notch
correction method such as the Neuber method to estimate the elastic-plastic stress and strain.
Main Index
21
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
3. From this point, calculate the next excursion using the hysteresis curve and the Neuber correction
again.
4. Repeat this process. When a cycle or cycles close, remove these points from the sequence, noting
the calculated total strain range, mean and maximum stress for the cycle, and reset the starting
point for the next strain excursion to the last remaining point.
5. Continue until the end of the history is reached and all cycles have closed.
Cyclic Properties
Cyclic material properties are those that are obtained from a material test similar to a monotonic test with
one big difference. The loading is reversed and cycled at various load levels. From these tests are derived
the cyclic stress-strain curve and the strain-life curve used in crack initiation analysis. At each load level
the stabilized hysteresis loop is extracted, its maximum stress/strain value extracted and plotted onto a
single plot to create the cyclic stress-strain curve.
Cyclic Hardening
This is a behavior exhibited by materials that, when subject to cyclic loading, actually strengthen with
time. This is illustrated by the hysteresis loops becoming taller and skinnier on stress-strain space. The
yield strength become greater.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
22
Cyclic Softening
This is a behavior exhibited by materials that, when subject to cyclic loading, weaken with time. This is
illustrated by the hysteresis loops becoming shorter and fatter on stress-strain space. The yield strength
lessens
.
da/dN Curve
This is the crack growth rate (da/dN). It is a material characteristic and as such, is treated as a material
data set and is obtained by experiments. It relates the growth rate of a crack to stress intensity (AK), or
in other words, the driving force of the crack. There are three regions on a da/dN curve. Region 1 is the
threshold region where the driving force is not great enough to grow a crack (like a fatigue limit). Region
2 is the linear region of the curve where behavior is described by the Paris equation. Region 3 is where
static or fast fracture occurs as the driving force reaches or becomes very near to the fracture toughness
of the material.
Main Index
23
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Damage (Log of Damage)
Damage is the reciprocal of Life. Sometimes it is reported in log base(10) units mainly for convenient
contour plotting.
Damage Summation
This is the mechanism of summing the damage from the various stress cycles. All cycles are identified
using rainflow cycle counting. Damage due to each is determined from the appropriate damage curve
such as an S-N or strain-Life curve. Damage is then summed using the linear damage summation law as
defined by Palmgren and Miner which simply states that each cycle causes a damage which is equal to
1/(number of cycles to failure at that load level). When you apply a series of cycles, damage is added up
linearly until the total is unity (1) when failure is predicted. Fatigue damage is a non-linear process, but
we find that if we have a fairly random repeated sequence it works satisfactorily.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
24
Damage Tolerant
This is a fatigue life design philosophy which adopts the crack growth method and is used in conjunction
with the fail safe philosophy. A crack or flaw is assumed to exist and its growth rate determined to set up
specific inspection periods to ensure that the flaw will not grow to any critical size between these
inspections.
Deterministic
This is a loading event which can be determined at any point in time, such as a constant amplitude sine
wave. Repeatable loading falls into this category. This is in opposition to a random load where no events
can be determined at any given point in time or more specifically, where the next sequence of events
cannot be determined from any previous events.
Durability
Durability is the conglomeration of all aspects that effect the life of a product and usually concerns itself
with much more than just fatigue and fracture, but also loading conditions, environmental concerns,
material characterizations, and testing simulations to name a few. A true product durability program in
an organization that takes all of these aspects and more into consideration.
Duty Cycle
A duty cycle is a series of events (roading, loading, digging, hauling, etc.) that comprises the typical
loading that a system will see throughout its life cycle. The duty cycle, as a sequence of events, is
processed through the analysis engine. Duty cycles can be processed by the fatigue analysis in three
different ways, which can be summarized as follows:
Independent mode. Each unique event in the duty cycle is processed separately, and the damage
from each is multiplied by the number of times it appears in the complete sequence. The total
damage is the sum of the damage from all the different events. This is fast, but may miss
significant cycles that cross different events.
Combined Full mode. All the events in the duty cycle are concatenated, including all repeats of
each event, and the resulting stress history is processed as if it was one long event. This is
accurate, but is computationally inefficient and could take a long time to process.
Main Index
25
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Combined Fast mode. An intermediate method that cycle counts events individually but also
captures the cycles that cross events. It will in general be almost as accurate as the Combined
Full option and almost as quick as the Independent mode.
The methods are best explained with the aid of a simple example.
Consider a duty cycle consisting of Event 1, which has 2 repeats, and Event 2, which has 3 repeats. We
will now consider how the resulting combined stress histories for these two events are handled by the
different duty cycle processing options. See glossary term Cycles (cycle counting) before reading this
explanation.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
26
In Independent mode, Event 1 is cycle counted. This results in a cycle with range B and a residual, which
is also closed to give cycle A. Each of these cycles appears twice in the duty cycle, so their damage is
calculated and multiplied by 2. The same procedure is applied separately to Event 2, resulting in 3 repeats
of cycles C, D and E.
The result can be summarized as 2*A, 2*B, 3*C, 3*D, 3*E.
This method has the virtue of being quick and simple, but it does miss out the obvious larger cycle formed
by the minimum of Event 1 and the maximum of Event 2. However, for many applications where there
are no big mean shifts between events, it may be sufficiently accurate.
In the Combined Full method, the entire duty cycle is concatenated, including every repeat of each event
in the correct sequence, and the result is rainflow counted from the beginning and the residuals closed
down.
The result in terms of cycles can be summarized as: 1*A, 2*B, 3*C, 2*D, 2*E, 1*F, 1*G.
This method has the virtue of being accurate no assumptions or approximations are made. However,
for duty cycles with many repeats of individual events it could be prohibitively slow.
Main Index
27
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
The Combined Fast option provides a good compromise between speed and accuracy. It works as
follows:
1. Each unique event is cycle counted. Cycles that close within individual events are multiplied by
the total number of repeats of that event. The residual for each event is also closed and multiplied
by the total number of repeats of that event less the number of times the event appears in the duty
cycle. In the case of Event 1, we get 2 repeats of cycle B and 1 repeat of cycle A.
2. The residuals for each event are concatenated in the sequence in which they occur and then cycle
counted, including closing down any residuals.
In this case, the resulting cycles are: 1*A, 2*B, 3*C, 2*D, 2*E, 1*F, 1*G. For this simple example, the
result is exactly the same as for the Combined Full option, but in general this cannot be guaranteed.
However, for almost all practical applications, this method should be sufficiently accurate.
Elastic
Elastic behavior refers to a component or material, which when subject to loading conditions that cause
structural deformation, if removed, returns to its original state. No permanent state of deformation is left
when the loads are removed. Linear elastic analysis denotes that as the loads vary, the responses vary in
a linear and elastic manner relative to the loads. For instance if you double or triple the load, the
responses will double or triple respectively. Whether the stresses exceed the yield or even the ultimate
stress is not taken into account.
Elastic-plastic Correction
Elastic-plastic corrections are often required because the local strain approach requires total (elastic-
plastic) strain as well as stress, yet for efficiency reasons, calculations often have to be based on linear
elastic finite element (FE) calculations. Notch corrections allow elastic plastic strains and stresses to be
estimated based on elastic FE results.
Neuber: The Neuber method provides a simple way of estimating the total elastic-plastic strain
and stress at an average stress concentration, based on the local elastic stress/strain. Consider a
simple notched specimen subjected to a uniaxial loading. As long as the yield stress is not
exceeded, linear FE analysis gives (assuming a good model) a reasonably accurate estimate of
the strain and stress at the root of the notch. However, once the yield stress is exceeded, the
elastic solution becomes increasingly unrealistic. In practice, as yielding occurs, there will be a
redistribution of stress and strain around the notch, so that the real strain will be greater than the
elastic value and the real stress less than the value from elastic analysis. The true solution must
lie somewhere on the material stress-strain curve. To get a reasonably accurate estimate of the
way this stress and strain is redistributed, we could carry out an elastic-plastic FE solution,
taking into account the geometry of the specimen, but this could be rather time consuming,
especially if we have to consider many loading cycles.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
28
The Neuber method provides a simple alternative that provides a rough estimate for how the
stress and strain might redistribute, without reference to the real geometry. The Neuber method
assumes that the product of stress and strain before and after redistribution is constant. This is
represented by the Neuber hyperbola, where the product of stress and strain is constant and equal
to the elastic stress x elastic strain.
The Neuber method can be applied to monotonic or cyclic loading. It is applied to cyclic loading,
in one of two ways:
1. To position the outside hysteresis loop by applying Neuber to the Abs Max value of the elastic
strain in the strain history, together with the cyclic stress-strain curve. This is achieved by solving
the pair of equations
2. To calculate a subsequent strain excursion, by applying Neuber to the elastic strain range of the
excursion, together with the hysteresis curve, i.e., by solving the pair of equations
These two ways of using Neuber are illustrated below. First, the position of the Absolute
Maximum value is estimated using the Neuber method at Point 1. All hysteresis loops are
positioned relative to this point. The next strain excursion, to Point 2, is then corrected by
applying the Neuber correction to the range of the excursion, using the hysteresis curve.
E c
e ABsMax ,
( )
2
o
max
c
max
=
c
max
o
max
E
------------
o
max
K
------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
E c
e
( )
2
AoAc =
Ac
Ao
E
------- 2
Ao
2K'
---------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
Main Index
29
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Note that the Neuber method as implemented takes the damage parameter (Abs Max Principal,
Signed von Mises, etc.) and treats it as if it is the strain under uniaxial loading conditions
(biaxiality ratio a = 0). In reality, the stress state is very often not uniaxial, and the Hoffmann-
Seeger method may give more realistic results.
Hoffmann-Seeger: The Hoffmann-Seeger method is a modified version of the Neuber method
that takes into account the state of stress, allowing it to be extended to proportional multiaxial
loadings. If the loading is very non-proportional, then most of the assumptions implicit in this
method are violated; hardening is really kinematic and not isotropic, and the principal axes may
not only rotate, but the principal stress and strain axes are no longer necessarily aligned with
each other.
The Hoffmann-Seeger method requires 2-D stresses or strains (e.g., from thin shells, or surface
resolved) and knowledge of the biaxiality ratio. As implemented, the Hoffmann-Seeger method
makes the following assumptions:
The principal stress and strain axes are fixed in orientation.
The ratio of the in-plane principal strains is constant.
The uniaxial stress-strain curve can be extended for use with von Mises equivalent stress and
strain under different states of stress.
Henckys flow rules.
Masings hypothesis and material memory are implemented to achieve stress-strain tracking
in the same way as with Neuber.
For convenience, the in-plane principal stresses and strains are denoted o
1
, o
2
, c
1
, c
2
and the
surface normal strain c
z
. The principals are ordered so that
Application of Neuber correction to cyclic loading
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
30
First, the elastic value of the signed von Mises strain is computed, which is defined as
If the chosen damage parameter (stress combination) is Signed von Mises, this is calculated
directly. However, in practice, the calculation will often be based upon the Abs Max Principal
strain, Critical Plane strain, etc. In these cases, the elastic equivalent (Signed von Mises) strain
can be deduced knowing the elastic Poisson ratio v
e
and the mean elastic biaxiality ratio a
e

(convert to von Mises).
If using Abs Max Principal Strain or Critical Plane
If using Signed Tresca or Type B Critical Plane Shear, and a
e
0
- or if a
e
< 0
Then the elastic equivalent stress can be deduced
where eq denotes elastic equivalent.
The strain biaxiality ratio is deduced from the mean value of the elastic biaxiality ratio (from the
multiaxial assessment) as follows:
This strain ratio is assumed constant.
Now the Neuber correction is carried out as normal, but based on the elastic equivalent strain and
stress, i.e., by solving
if positioning the largest hysteresis loop, or
o
1
o
2
> c
1
c
2
> ,
c
eq
c
1
c
1
--------
1
1 v
e
+ ( ) 2
---------------------------- c
1
c
2
( )
2
c
2
c
z
( )
2
c
z
c
1
( )
2
+ + =
c
eq
c
1
1 a
e
a
e
2
+
1 a
e
v
e
--------------------
-------------------------------------- =
c
eq
c
Si gnedTresca
1 a
e
a
e
2
+ =
c
eq
c
Si gnedTresca
1 a
e
a
e
2
+
1 a
e
------------------------------------------------------------------- =
o
eq
Ec
eq
=
c
2
c
1
-----
a
e
v
e
1 a
e
v
e
-------------------- =
c
q
o
q
E
------
o
q
K'
------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ = and o
q
c
q
o
eq
= c
eq
Ec
eq
2
=
Main Index
31
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
for subsequent strain excursions. The subscript q here denotes the estimated elastic-plastic
strain and stress.
Once the plasticity correction has been carried out, the principal stresses and strains can be
calculated, assuming Henckys flow rules and that the principal strain ratio remains constant.
First, the effective Poisson ratio must be calculated:
Then

a is the elastic plastic biaxiality ratio. (If the ratio of the principal strains is considered fixed, the
ratio of the principal stresses will in general change.)
Critical plane strain is treated as if it were Abs Max Principal Strain, and Type B Critical Plane
Shear strain is treated as if it were Signed Tresca Strain.
Ac
q
Ao
q
E
---------- 2
Ao
q
2K'
----------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ = and Ao
q
Ac
q
Ao
eq
= Ac
eq
EAc
eq
2
=
v' 0.5 0.5 v
e
( )
o
q
Ec
q
--------- =
c
1
c
4
1 v' a
1 a a
2
+
------------------------------ =
c
2
c
2
c
1
-----
\ .
| |
c
1
=
o
1
o
4
1
1 a a
2
+
------------------------------ =
o
2
ao
1
=
a
o
2
o
1
------
c
2
c
1
----- v' +
1 v'
c
2
c
1
----- +
-------------------- - = =
a
o
2
o
1
------
c
2
c
1
----- v' +
1 v'
c
2
c
1
----- +
-------------------- - = =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
32
Note that the assumption of constant strain ratio means that the Hoffmann-Seeger method will
give slightly different results to the Neuber method for uniaxial loadings. However, the
differences are small, and as long as 2-D FE results are available, the Hoffmann-Seeger method
is a sensible default.
Endurance Limit
This is similar to the fatigue limit and is an imposed limit of reversals on strain-Life curves above which
the component is said to have infinite life. This limit, referred to as the material cut-off, is set to 2e8
reversals but can be changed by the user.
Event Processing
See glossary term Duty Cycle.
Failure Criterion
The criterion that defines failure such as catastrophic failure into two or more pieces, until an engineering
crack of 2mm appears, or until a crack reaches a critical size to be deemed unsafe. Understanding the
failure criterion in a fatigue analysis is very important. The material properties used in any fatigue
analysis, be it an S-N curve, strain-Life curve, or crack propagation da/dN curves, define the failure
criterion.
Fail Safe
This is a fatigue life design philosophy which adopts the total life (S-N) method generally where failure
cannot be tolerated. Therefore built in redundancy is generally used such that if a failure were to occur,
the structure would fall into a state that it would survive until repair can be accommodated.
Fatigue
This is a failure under a repeated or otherwise varying load which never reaches a level sufficient to cause
failure in a single application. The initiation and growth of a crack, or growth from a pre-existing defect,
until it reaches a critical size, such as separation into two or more parts
Fatigue Concentration Factor, K
f
This is similar to the stress concentration, K
t
, except it accounts for the fact that small notches have less
effect on fatigue than is indicated by K
t
. This has led to the idea of a fatigue concentration factor, K
f
,
which is normally less than K
t
, being introduced and being used to replace K
t
within Neubers rule. K
f
is
related to K
t
according to
where p is a material constant dependent on grain size and strength and r is the notch root radius.
K
f
1 K
t
1 ( ) + ( ) 1 p' r + ( ) =
Main Index
33
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Fatigue Limit
This is a stress level below which no fatigue failures will occur. See Stress-Life (S-N), (page 68).
Fourier Analysis
In simplistic terms, Fourier analysis is the ability to represent a finite length of time signal by the sum of
a series of sine waves with varying amplitudes, frequencies, and phases.
Fracture
A fracture is the growth or propagation of a crack once it has been initiated. Fracture also denotes sudden
breakage of a component or structure in two. However for the purposes of this manual it refers to the life
prediction method of crack growth as implemented using LEFM. See LEFM, (page 42).
Fracture Mechanics Triangle
The fracture mechanics triangle states that if any two of the three variables are known, through fracture
mechanics and their relationships to one another, the other can be determined.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
34
Frequency Domain
The time domain relates a variable (stress) to time and describes how the variable changes with time.
Time signals can also be represented in the frequency domain which relates the variable to frequency,
describing how that variable changes with or is affected by frequency. The time and frequency domains
present the same information in different ways, helping the engineer understand the effect a signal or
response may have on a structure. Consider, for example, a random signal which when converted to the
frequency domain shows only content at 10 Hz. This signal when applied to a structure with natural
frequencies well above 10 Hz may not be damaging at sufficiently low enough levels. However if the
structure has natural frequencies in the 10 Hz range, the signal would be far more damaging. Being able
to view a signal in the frequency domain can alert an engineer to this potential danger.
Gaussian
For a random signal and for most engineering purposes the amplitude Probability Density Function
(PDF) will be approximately Gaussian. This means that the density distribution will take on a bell like
curve as shown here where the highest levels of the signal are the least probable of occurring. See also
glossary term Power Spectral Density (PSD).
Gerber Mean Stress
This is a mechanism to correct for a non-zero mean stress range for the S-N method. See glossary term
Mean Stress Correction.
Goodman Mean Stress
This is a mechanism to correct for a non-zero mean stress for the S-N method. This is a more conservative
method than the Gerber one. See glossary term Mean Stress Correction.
Main Index
35
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Haigh
Another way of defining stress-life data is in terms of a constant life sometimes referred to as a Haigh
diagram. The material behavior is described by a number of curves on a plot of stress amplitude vs. mean
stress, each of which represents test failures with the same fatigue life. See glossary term Interpolation
for more details.
High Cycle Fatigue (HCF)
This is the ability of a component or structure to withstand or survive many stress cycles. S-N analysis
applications deal completely in the high cycle regime and are not valid in the low cycle regime. The
technical definition of high cycle versus low cycle fatigue is where the elastic and plastic strain-Life
curves cross each other on the strain-Life plot. This is known as the transition life above which is high
cycle fatigue and below which is low cycle fatigue. It is clear that above the transition life elastic events
dominate and below it, plastic events dominate. S-N analysis does not compensate for plastic events in
an adequate way as the strain-life method does and for this reason is not a good choice for low cycle
fatigue problems. The strain-life method can handle both high and low cycle fatigue problems. The
transition life is generally around 10
4
or 10
5
cycles and is material dependent.
Hoffman-Seeger
See glossary term Elastic-plastic Correction.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
36
Hysteresis
This is a material behavior that is illustrated by loading a material beyond its yield point and then
unloading it and perhaps reversing the load until it yields in compression and cycling. When the stress
and strain are cross plotted, they create plots such as the one shown here. Each loop is a hysteresis loop.
This phenomenon is know as the Baushinger effect after the German engineer that first documented this
behavior of most metallic materials.
Inverse Fourier Transform
The ability or methodology of converting a frequency domain signal back into the time domain by
recreating the time signal from a power spectral density (PSD) function is called the Inverse Fourier
Transformation. Because no phase information is kept with a PSD, random phases are created. The
regenerated time signal will not be exactly the same as the original but will be statistically equivalent.
Interpolation
The S-N analysis can accept the S-N data in the form of a family of curves representing the fatigue
strength of the material at different mean stress levels. This is another way of compensating for mean
stress effects.The normal way to use such a curve set is to interpolate between the curves to determine
the life and corresponding damage for each cycle. This process is illustrated in the following diagram for
constant mean, constant r-ratio, and constant (Haigh) curves.
Constant Mean Curves: The material S-N behavior is described in this case by two S-N curves
representing the material at mean stress levels of 0 and 100.
Main Index
37
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Consider a cycle with Range X. First we must identify which two curves to use for
interpolation by finding the pair with mean values either side of that of our cycle.
If the cycle has a mean of 50, this lies between our two curves. In this case, we look up the
log(Life) values on the two curves corresponding to LogX, and locate points A and B. If
necessary, we extrapolate the curves beyond their end points. We then linearly interpolate
between these two log(Life) values based upon the mean stress of our cycle to determine the
log(Life) of our cycle.
If the cycle has a mean less than or equal to the minimum mean of all the curves (in this case
0), the life is determined using the curve with the minimum mean value. The life corresponds
to Point B.
If the cycle has a mean greater than the maximum mean in the curve set, in this case 100,
either the two curves with the highest mean values can be used to determine the log(life) by
extrapolation, or the curve with the highest mean may be used, i.e., in this case the life
corresponds to point A. This is controlled by the interpolation limit property.
Consider a cycle with range Y. This corresponds to point C on the Mean = 100 curve, but it
does not intersect the mean = 0 curve, or that intersection point is beyond the Fatigue Cutoff
Life. In this case, the second point D used for interpolation or extrapolation is set to 30
(corresponding to life of 1E30).
Consider now a cycle with Range Z. This cycle does not intersect any of the S-N curves at
a value less than the material cutoff, so the damage value will be set to zero. Any cycle for
which the resulting life is beyond the material cutoff will have its damage set to zero.
Constant Mean S-N Curves
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
38
Constant R-ratio Curves: The handling of multiple r-ratio curve data is very similar to that of
constant mean data. The material S-N behavior is described in this case by two S-N curves
representing the material at R-ratios of -1 and 0.
Consider a cycle with range X. First we must identify which two curves to use for
interpolation by finding the pair with mean values either side of that of our cycle. We have to
be a little careful because the R-ratio has two distinct regimes bounded by the condition where
maximum stress = 0, at which point R is undefined.
Constant R-ratio Curves
Main Index
39
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
If the cycle has an R-ratio of -0.5, this lies between our two curves. In this case, we look up
the log(Life) values on the two curves corresponding to LogX, and locate points A and B. If
necessary, we extrapolate the curves beyond their end points. We then calculate the mean
stress corresponding to points A and B and linearly interpolate between these two log(Life)
values based upon the mean stress of our cycle to determine the log(Life) of our cycle. We
don not use the R-ratio for interpolation because of the non-linear and discontinuous behavior
illustrated in the figure of lines of constant R-ratio above.
Assuming that there are no curves present with R > 1 (i.e., totally in the compressive regime,
which is unlikely):
If the cycle has an R-ratio less than or equal to the minimum curve R-ratio, or which is
greater than 1, the life is determined using the curve with the minimum R-ratio value.
If the cycle has an R-ratio greater than the maximum R-ratio in the curve set, but less
than 1, either the two curves with the highest R-ratio values can be used to determine
the log(life) by extrapolation, or the curve with the highest R-ratio value may be used,
i.e., in this case, the life would correspond to point A. This is controlled by the
interpolation limit property.
Consider a cycle with Range Y. This corresponds to point C on the R = 0, but it does not
intersect the R = -1 curve, or that intersection point is beyond the Fatigue Cutoff Life. In this
case, the second point D used for interpolation or extrapolation is set to 30 (corresponding to
a life of 1E30).
Consider now a cycle with Range Z. This cycle does not intersect any of the S-N curves at
a value less than the material cutoff, so the damage value will be set to zero. Any cycle for
which the resulting life is beyond the material cutoff will have its damage set to zero.
Lines of Constant R-ratio
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
40
Constant Life (Haigh) Curves: Another way of defining stress-life data is in terms of a constant
life or Haigh diagram. The material behavior is described by a number of curves on a plot of
stress amplitude vs. mean stress, each of which represents test failures with the same fatigue life.
The life for a given cycle is determined by interpolation between the curves of the Haigh
diagram. For example, in the illustration below, consider the cycle represented by point A. This
lies between the curves for N
f
= 1E4 and N
f
= 1E6. Based upon the mean stress of this cycle, we
look up the stress amplitudes corresponding to points D and E. The life for this cycle is
determined by linear interpolation of the log(Life) between these points. For example, if A lies
halfway between D and E, the predicted life for that cycle will be 1E5 (damage 1E-5).
The stress amplitude points for interpolation may be determined by extrapolation if necessary, as
for point C.
For a cycle that lies above or below all the curves such as that represented by point B, the life and
damage is determined by extrapolation (subject to limitations imposed by the MaxDamage and
Fatigue cutoff properties).
Results based upon cycles that use extrapolation should be treated with some caution.
Main Index
41
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Irregularity Factor
This is a parameter for describing or characterizing a process such as a time signal or a power spectral
density function. For a time signal, it is defined as the ratio of the number of times a signal passes upward
in a positive manner through the mean of a signal divided by the number of peaks. In the frequency
domain, the irregularity factor is determined from its moments. The irregularity factor takes on values
between zero and one, one describing a narrow band process and non-zero values describing wide or
broad band processes. A value of unity describes a process whose peaks and adjacent valleys are roughly
Fatigue Life by Interpolation using Haigh Diagram
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
42
the same order of magnitude but of opposite sign whereas a value of near zero represents a signal that has
an infinite number of peaks versus upward mean crossings, e.g., a dominate sine wave with noise
superimposed on top of it.
K-Solution
See glossary term Compliance Function.
LEFM
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics. This is the art of crack growth prediction as determined from linear
elastic stresses. It assumes only a localized plastic zone around the crack tip and uses the stress intensity
or driving force of the crack to determine crack growth rates according to the Paris equation.
Life (Log of Life)
The Life (Log of Life) is the result reported as to how long a component or structure will last. This life
can be reported in terms of stress cycles or reversals survived, however this is usually not a convenient
way of reporting it. Time series are generally given some sort of fatigue equivalent units such as laps,
miles, hours, missions, etc., which are more descriptive to a user in describing the life. A repeat of a time
history may have many stress cycles but can be described as representative of, say, 30 times around a
cobblestone test track. The life is then reported as laps. Because the computed life of a component can
vary dramatically from location to location on the component itself, the life is often reported in log (base
10) units. This is convenient because the spread can be from some small finite number (1000) to infinite
life (the cutoff being around 10
18
). This helps spread out contour bands on graphical plots for better
visualization and for xy plots.
Local Strain
See glossary term Strain-Life (e-N).
Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF)
Low cycle fatigue is the inability of a component or structure to withstand or survive many stress cycles.
See glossary term High Cycle Fatigue (HCF).
Material Cut-off
See glossary term Endurance Limit.
Material Generation
Allows for standard S-N, c-N or Dang Van fatigue material properties to be estimated or derived, based
on basic information such as the type and strength of the material.
Standard properties can be generated for four(4) different material classes - Ferrous, Aluminium,
Titanium and Other. Apart from selecting the material class, the user provides the static strength (UTS)
and an estimate of the Standard Error of log(N), except for the case of "Other" materials, where the
Elastic Modulus and Reduction in Area (%) are also required. The fatigue properties are then calculated
as follows. Note that any property values not listed are not set.
Main Index
43
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Then the S-N curve is defined by the values of the stress at 1000 cycles (call this S1) and at the transition
life Nc1 (call this S2).
Parameter
Name
Calculation
Ferrous Aluminum Titanium Other
MaterialType 99 100 300 0
UTS User entry User entry User entry User entry
E 210000 MPa 73000 MPa 110000 MPa User entry
Me 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Mp 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Parameter
Name
S-N Calculation
S1 0.9 x UTS 0.7 x UTS 0.8 x UTS 0.8 x UTS
S2 0.357 x UTS 0.258 x UTS 0.307 x UTS 0.274 x UTS
Parameter
Name
S-N Calculation
SRI1 2 x S2/(Nc1)b1 2 x S2/(Nc1)b1 2 x S2/(Nc1)b1 2 x S2/(Nc1)b1
b1 (log(S2) -
log(S1))/(log(Nc1)
- 3)
(log(S2) -
log(S1))/(log(Nc1)
- 3)
(log(S2) -
log(S1))/(log(Nc1)
- 3)
(log(S2) -
log(S1))/(log(Nc1)
- 3)
Nc1 1E6 5E8 1E6 1E6
b2 b1/(2 + b1) b1/(2 + b1) b1/(2 + b1) b1/(2 + b1)
SE User entry User entry User entry User entry
RR -1 -1 -1 -1
Parameter
Name
c-N Calculation
Sf '1.5 x UTS '1.67 x UTS '1.67 x UTS '1.9 x UTS
b -0.087 -0.095 -0.095 -0.12
c -0.58 -0.69 -0.69 -0.6
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
44
where
if UTS/E > 3E-3, ? = 1.0
if 3E-3 < UTS/E < 1E-2, ? = 1.375 - (125 x UTS/E)
if E-2 < UTS/E, ? = 0.1
and where
D = log (1/(1-RA/100)). RA is the Reduction in Area (%) entered by the user.
Dang Van properties can be estimated for ferrous materials only, based on the UTS as follows:
Material S-N
This is an S-N curve that relates local stress (o) to life. These types of curves are generally obtained
through material tests of highly polished test coupons where the monitored stress is the stress experienced
at the failure location. These type of S-N curves are geometry independent; that is, the S-N curves are
valid for any geometry and are only dependent on the actual material that they represent. All plasticity
modeling is built into the curve.
Ef '0.59 '0.35 '0.35 '0.76 x D0.6
n '0.15 '0.11 '0.11 '0.2
K '1.65 x UTS '1.61 x UTS '1.61 x UTS 'Sf'/(Ef'n')
Nc 2E8 2E8 2E8 2E8
SEe User entry User entry User entry User entry
SEp User entry User entry User entry User entry
SEc User entry User entry User entry User entry
Material Parameter Description
MaterialType 99
UTS User Entry
E 210000
TAFE 0.28 x UTS if UTS < 1400 MPa; 430 MPa if UTS > 1400 MPa
HSS 0.35
Parameter
Name
c-N Calculation
Main Index
45
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Mean
Mean is the average value of a cycle or signal. It is the maximum plus the minimum divided by two for
a simple constant amplitude oscillating signal as shown here. Note that the two small cycles in the stress-
strain plot have the same strain range but have different mean stress.
Mean Stress Correction
This is a technique for correcting or compensating for non-zero mean signals when looking up damage
on damage curves that have been created with zero mean (R=-1) signals in a test laboratory. Various
methods exist for both the S-N and strain-life methods. Fracture mechanics uses different da/dN curves
for different R-ratios. See also Interpolation, which is used for mean stress correction using multiple life
curve. For the S-N method:
Goodman: The Goodman mean stress correction calculates an effective stress amplitude based
upon the mean stress and UTS of each cycle. Again, this can work with all S-N data types, but if
it is to function with multiple curve data, the material data set must include data sets
corresponding to zero mean or R = -1, otherwise an error message is issued.
In its original form, it is used to calculate an effective stress S
e
that can be compared to an R = -
1 S-N curve, based upon the stress amplitude S
a
, mean stress S
m
and the material UTS:
This has been extended to allow the equivalent stress to be determined for any R-ratio:
This is illustrated below:
o
m
o
max
o
min
+
2
------------------------------------ =
S
a
S
e
R= 1 ( )
-------------------------
S
m
UTS
----------- + 1 =
S
e
RR ( ) S
a
UTS
UTS S
m
S
a
1 RR + ( ) 1 RR ( ) +
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
46
Goodman Tension Only: The Goodman correction in the form described above can be rather
non-conservative for cycles with compressive mean stresses. Goodman Tension Only addresses
this by flattening off the constant life curve when the mean stress is compressive, as illustrated
below:
Goodman Mean Stress Correction
Main Index
47
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Gerber: The Gerber correction in its original form is similar to Goodman, except that the
second term is squared:
We can then calculate the equivalent stress for any other R-ratio RR:
Graphically, this looks like:
Goodman Tension Only Mean Stress Correction
S
a
S
e
R= 1 ( )
-------------------------
S
m
UTS
-----------
\ .
| |
2
+ 1 =
S
e
RR ( ) 1
4 S
e
R=-1 ( ) 1 RR + ( )
2

1 RR ( )
2
UTS
2
--------------------------------------------------------------- +
\ .
|
| |
1
\ .
|
| |
1 RR ( )
2
UTS
2
2 S
e
R=-1 ( ) 1 RR + ( )
2

--------------------------------------------------------------- =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
48
In practice this is not very realistic, because the reduction in fatigue strength under compressive
loading is the same as it is under tensile loading. The Gerber correction in its original form will
in general be rather non-conservative for tensile mean stresses and rather pessimistic for
compressive mean stresses. This is particularly unrealistic, and so the method as implemented is
modified so that for compressive loadings:
Nevertheless, this method is not highly recommended. Also (although this is not likely to be an
issue in practice) the user can imagine that this method may have problems finding a unique
solution for the equivalent stress, or any solution at all, when RR (the R-ratio of the test data) lies
deep in the compressive region.
Gerber Mean Stress Correction
S
a
S
e
R=-1 ( )
-----------------------
S
m
UTS
-----------
\ .
| |
2
1 =
Main Index
49
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Gerber Tension Only: This option provides a better solution by flattening off the constant life
diagram in the compressive region in the same way as for Goodman Tension Only.
Interpolate: When Interpolate is selected, the mean stress effect will be taken into account by
interpolation (or extrapolation) from multiple curves. The exact method depends upon the S-N
data type. See glossary term Interpolation.
Modified Gerber Mean Stress Correction
Tension Only Gerber Mean Stress Correction
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
50
FKM: The FKM method as implemented here is based upon the method described in the FKM
Guideline Analytical Strength Assessment of Components in Mechanical Engineering, Tr. E.
Haibach. 2003.
In essence it uses 4 factors M
1-4
which define the sensitivity to mean stress in 4 regimes:
1. R>1
2. infinity <= R < 0
3. 0 <= R < 0.5
4. 0.5 <= R < 1
where R is the stress ratio (min/max) of the loading cycle. The method allows us to determine the
equivalent stress amplitude S-
eq
at a particular material R-ratio, R
ref
. The method is illustrated in
the form of a constant life or Haigh diagram:
The values of M
1-4
can be determined from material tests or estimated as follows:
M
1
= 0
M
2
= -M
o
M
3
= -M
o
/3
M
4
= 0
Where the value of M
o
is estimated as follows for the supported material types:
M
o
= a
M
*10
-3
*R
m
+ b
M
where a
M
and b
M
are constants and R
m
is the UTS in MPa.
FKM Mean Stress Correction
Main Index
51
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Values of a
M
and b
M
for the different supported material classes are as follows:
In the software, if M
1-4
are undefined, and the material type is one of those listed, all the
parameters will be estimated using these rules. If only M
2
is defined, then M
1
and M
4
will be set
to zero and M
3
to M
2
/3
Morrow: Used in c-N analysis only, the Morrow mean stress correction adjusts the value of the
intercept of the elastic part of the strain life curve before looking up the life/damage, on a cycle-
by-cycle basis as follows:
where o
m
is the mean stress of each cycle. The effect of this mean stress correction, correlated
with test data, is illustrated below:
Table 2-2 FKM Mean Stress Correction Parameters
Material
Type Steel
GS
(cast
steel)
GGG
(nodular
cast
iron)
GT
(malleable
cast iron)
GG (cast
iron with
lamellar
graphite)
Wrought
Al alloy
Cast
Al
alloy
Material Type
No. (CODE)
13,14,16-22-
25,26-99
9-12,15 5-8 2-4 1 100-105 106
a
M
.35 .35 .35 .35 0 1.0 1.0
b
M
-0.1 0.05 0.08 0.13 0.5 -0.04 0.2
c
a
o
f
' o
m
( )
E
-------------------------- 2N
f
( )
b
c
f
' 2N
f
( )
c
+ =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
52
Smith Watson Topper (SWT): Used in c-N analysis only, while loosely termed a mean stress
correction method, the Smith-Watson-Topper method actually defines a new damage parameter
based upon the product of the strain amplitude and the maximum stress of each cycle.
In practice, there are two ways this can be applied.
In the Formula method, the following equation is solved for life/damage.
In the Iterative method (not currently supported), a fully reversed cycle that has the same
value of P
SWT
as the cycle being analyzed is sought.
The strain amplitude of the fully reversed cycle defines an equivalent strain amplitude that can
be looked up on the standard strain-life curve. Because the strain amplitude and max stress of
the equivalent fully reversed cycle are related by the cyclic stress-strain curve, the equations
to be solved are:
P
SWT
c
a
o
max
=
c
a
o
max
o
f
' ( )
E
------------
2
2N
f
( )
2b
c
f
' o
f
' 2N
f
( )
b c +
+ =
P
SWT
c
a
o
max
c
a equi v ,
o
max equi v ,
= =
c
a equi v ,
o
max equi v ,
E
---------------------------
o
max equi v ,
K
---------------------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
Main Index
53
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
The equivalent stress amplitude is then looked up on the standard strain-life curve as normal.
Generally, the Iterative method is considered a more correct approach.
Miners Constant
Miners constant is the damage summation constant that defines failure, usually set to unity (1). See
glossary term Damage Summation.
Monotonic Properties
Monotonic material properties are those that are obtained from a material test. Test coupons are placed
in servo-hydraulic machines and loaded in a single application of steady load increase through the yield
point of the material and to ultimate fracture of material. From these tests come various material
parameters such as Youngs Modulus (E), the yield strength (o
y
), and the ultimate tensile (UTS). The
load is not reversed, nor is it cycled to obtain these properties.
Morrow Mean Stress
A mechanism to correct for non-zero mean stress for the strain-life method. See glossary term Mean
Stress Correction.
Multiaxial
Multiaxial means that the stress state is not uniaxial. More than one principal stress exists. The biaxiality
ratio, a
e
, defined as the minimum in-plane stress divided by the maximum in-plane stress (for surface
stresses), is non-zero. There are two different degrees of multiaxial stress states: proportional and non-
proportional. Proportional multi-axial or proportional loading refers to the principal stresses always
being in proportion to one another in magnitude and are stationary. Stationary means that the principal
stress axes do not rotate significantly with time or in other words, the maximum and minimum principal
stresses are always in the same direction. Non-proportional loading is the opposite of this where the two
principal in-plane stresses are not proportional to each other at any given time, nor is the principal stress
axis always in the same direction.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
54
Narrow Band
This is a signal which contains frequency content predominantly at or around one frequency which when
converted to the frequency domain appears as single peak spanning only a portion of the frequencies.
Neubers Rule
See glossary term Elastic-plastic Correction.
Non-proportional Loading
See glossary term Multiaxial.
Notch Correction
This is a term that is adopted in the FE-fatigue world to signify the correction from purely elastic stresses
and strains to elastic-plastic stresses and strains. See glossary term Elastic-plastic Correction.
Historically the term comes from determination of stress at a notch while taking measurements away
from the notch and using a stress concentration factor, K
t
, knowing that the material has yielded in the
notch area and an additional correction needs to be made to determine the true stress (and/or strain).
Offset
See glossary term Scale Factor and Offset.
Paris Equation
This is the main equation that governs the LEFM (crack growth) method and relates the crack growth
rate (da/dN) to stress intensity (AK). , where C and m are material constants.
Peak-Valley Extraction
See glossary term Time History Compression.
Plastic Load Limit Correction
See glossary term Shape Factor.
da
dN
------- C AK ( )
m
=
Main Index
55
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Plasticity
Fatigue does not generally involve major changes to the properties of the bulk of the material in a
component. In most components that have failed by fatigue, the processes that lead to the fatigue failure
are confined to the region around the crack tip. Fatigue is always caused by plastic deformation.
Plasticity is an irreversible process of deforming the material beyond its yield point. Some who have
experienced fatigue failures may say there is no plastic deformation in my component, or the FEA
results showed that all stresses were below yield. If there is a fatigue failure, then there must be plastic
deformation, even if it is confined to only a few grains, or to a very small region around the tip of a crack
or a notch.
Power Spectral Density (PSD)
The term originated with electronic engineers in the 1940s trying to characterize equipment noise. The
PSD is a way of describing a random time signal. A random signal is random because there is no way of
predicting a future section of the signal from previous sections. Therefore some sort of statistical method
of describing these signals was devised. By taking a time signal, squaring it, and taking its average you
get what is called the mean square value. If the squared signal is passed through a low pass filter at
various cut-off frequencies, the mean value can be plotted as a function of frequency. The slope of this
curve describes the density of the mean square with respect to frequency and is called a spectrum. The
term spectral density comes from the fact that it is a property with respect to frequency such as a
rainbow which is the variations of frequency in the colors of visible light. The term power dates back
to the electrical engineers who used power as the key parameter. Dynamicists have simply adopted the
term. In simple summary, a PSD is nothing other than an equivalent representation of a random time
signal in a different domain, which has certain advantages over the time domain. In terms of Fourier
analysis, the area under any infinitesimal strips of the PSD represents the mean square of the sine wave
at that frequency where a time signal is made up of a number of sine waves summed together.
Probabilistic Nature of Fatigue
See glossary term Certainty of Survival.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
56
Probability Density Function (PDF)
Two important Probability Density Functions (PDF) can be computed from a stress or strain time history.
These are the amplitude and peak PDFs as shown. The best way to visualize these parameters is to draw
tram lines horizontally through the time history and then count either the number of times the signal
crosses the tram lines or the number of times a peak occurs in-between the tram lines. The complete PDFs
are obtained by repeating this process for all horizontal levels in the signal. For most engineering
purposes the amplitude PDF will be approximately Gaussian. Furthermore, for a narrow band process the
peak PDF will be approximately equivalent to the Rayleigh PDF. A PDF, therefore, is the probability of
a certain stress or strain level occurring and is represented as a density distribution.
Proportional Loading
See glossary term Multiaxial.
R-Ratio
This is a measure of the mean stress or the mean of constant amplitude signal or the mean of a stress cycle.
R = -1 is a fully reversed signal or a cycle with zero mean. R = 0 is a signal which goes from zero to a
maximum value and returns to zero. R = infinity is the reverse where the signal goes from zero to a
negative maximum value and back to zero.
See glossary term Cycles (cycle counting).
Random Vibration
This is excitation due to loading which is random in nature. That is to say that at any particular point in
time it is impossible to determine anything specific about the loading. It can only be described by its
statistics such a mean level, rms, standard deviation, etc. This is in opposition to a loading event which
can be determined at any point in time, such as a constant amplitude sine wave. Random vibration is
Main Index
57
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
usually dealt with in the frequency domain by converting signals to power spectral density functions
(PSDs).
Range
Range is the total absolute magnitude between the maximum and minimum values of a cycle. Note that
the two small cycles in the stress-strain plot have the same stress and strain range but have different mean
stress.
Reference Location
When dealing with component S-N curves, this is the location on the test specimens used to create the
S-N curve. The nominal stress axis of the S-N curve relates stress levels at this location to failure. When
using a component S-N curve in conjunction with finite element models you must know the equivalent
location (reference location) as only stress from this location relates to the S-N curve.
Regression Analysis
Regression analysis is the art of taking measured data such as that for an S-N curve and determining an
equation to describe the curve from the raw data, also called curve fitting.
Ao o
max
o
min
=
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
58
Residual Stress
This is a permanent stress that is left behind in a component or structure after unloading. Residual stress
can be caused or induced in a number of ways such as shot peening, overloads, and manufacturing
processes to name a few. Residual stresses can be tensile (positive) or compressive (negative) in nature
and can be beneficial to bettering fatigue life (compressive) or detrimental (tensile).
Root Mean Square (rms)
By taking a time signal, squaring it, then taking the average, you get the mean square of the signal. If you
take the square root of the mean square of the signal you get the root mean square (rms). The rms is a
parameter that allows you to gauge the overall intensity of a signal relative to another random signal.
Safe Life
This is a fatigue design philosophy which adopts the crack initiation method. In general it is applied to
relatively inexpensive components which can easily be thrown away and replaced. In addition it is
applied to structures or parts where the initiation of a crack takes up the majority of the life relative to the
growth of the crack or where it is intolerable to have a crack in the structure. This philosophy generally
produces fairly optimized structures and is used heavily in the ground vehicle industry. A failure of a
component designed with this philosophy should not have catastrophic consequences.
Sample Rate
When measuring a signal, the sample rate is the number of times you take a sample in a given period of
time, usually one second. It is the frequency of samples in number/second. Sampling too slowly can
cause important loading events to be missed.
Scale Factor and Offset
The scale factor and offset settings allow the user to manipulate the stresses or strains before further
analysis, for whatever purpose. For example, the offset might be used as a simple way to explore the
possible effect of a residual stress.
In the case of the S-N analysis, the scale factor and offset are applied to the combined stress history (i.e.,
after extracting the Abs Max Principal, Critical Plane stress, etc.) before cycle counting.
(Stress for cycle counting) = (Combined stress) x (Scale Factor) + (Offset)
In the case of the c-N method, the offset, which is defined as a stress, has to be converted into strain units
first, so:
(Strain for cycle counting) = (Combined strain) x (Scale Factor) + (Offset)/E
In the case of the Dang Van approach, because it is a multiaxial safety factor approach, and because it
includes an elastic shakedown procedure, definition of an offset of undefined direction makes little sense.
For this reason, the Dang Van engine supports only the scale factor, which is applied to the whole stress
tensor before the Dang Van calculation.
Main Index
59
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Seeger-Heuler
See glossary term Shape Factor.
Shape Factor
This property is used by c-N analysis only, and when defined, invokes the Seeger-Heuler plastic limit
load correction.
Simple notch rules such as the Neubers Rule and Hoffman-Seeger rules estimate the redistribution of
stress and strain around a notch with limited yielding, but with no reference to the geometry of the
component. In practice, particularly when a notch is shallow or the loading is high, plasticity may
become more widespread, and these simple notch rules may then significantly underestimate the plastic
strains.
The Seeger-Heuler method provides a variation on the Neuber or Hoffmann-Seeger methods that
increases the amount of plasticity estimated when net section yielding is predicted, based on the Shape
Factor. The Shape Factor for any section is defined as the ratio of the plastic limit load to the yield load.
Simple notch rules such as the Neuber and Hoffmann-Seeger rules estimate the redistribution of stress
and strain around a notch with limited yielding, but with no reference to the geometry of the component.
In practice, particularly when a notch is shallow or the loading is high, plasticity may become more
widespread, and these simple notch rules may then significantly underestimate the plastic strains.
The Seeger-Heuler method provides a variation on the Neuber or Hoffmann-Seeger methods that
increases the amount of plasticity estimated when net section yielding is predicted, based on a Shape
Factor. If this property is not defined there is no effect of shape factor considered.
The Shape Factor or limit load ratio for any cross-section is defined:
the ratio of the plastic limit load (load at which plasticity spreads across the section) to the yield load
(load at which yielding starts). This limit load ratio or shape factor or formzahl can be calculated for
simple sections assuming an idealized elastic-perfectly plastic stress-strain curve.
For example:
o
p
L
p
L
y
------ =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
60
Suppose we now add a small notch to the surface of the bar with a stress concentration factor of 2.5, the
yield load will be reduced by a factor of 2.5, but if the notch is small the plastic limit load will be more
or less unaffected, so we might estimate a shape factor for the notched bar as 2.5 x 1.5 = 3.75
An unnotched bar in tension is a trivial case where .
From similar arguments, a plate with a small round hole in tension would have
With the Seeger Heuler plastic limit load correction method, the application of the notch rule is very
similar to that described for the Neuber method described earlier, the only difference being that the stress-
strain product is modified.
1. To determine the position of the largest hysteresis loop, we solve
for and .
2. To determine the range of stress and strain associated with each subsequent excursion, we solve:

for and .
When the strain levels are low and/or the shape factor is large, the terms
o
p
1
o
p
3.
oc Ec
e
o
p
c
e
o
p
------
Ec
e
o
p
K'
------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+
\ .
|
|
| |
and = c
o
E
---
o
K'
-----
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ = c o
AoAc EAc
e
o
p
2
Ac
e
2o
p
---------
EAc
e
2o
p
K'
----------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+
\ .
|
|
| |
and =
Ac
2
------
Ao
2E
-------
Ao
2K'
---------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
Ac Ao
EAc
e
2o
p
K'
----------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
and
Ec
e
o
p
K'
------------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
Main Index
61
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
become insignificant, and the solution converges with the Neuber method.
Since this approach could equally well be applied to the equivalent stress and strain, it is compatible with
the Hoffmann-Seeger method.
Spectral Moments
Spectral moments are used to obtain other statistical properties of the PSD. The n-th spectral moment
of a PSD is defined by
Strain Combination
The combination method defines how a damage parameter for fatigue calculation will be extracted from
the strain tensor history. The options, based on the strain tensor c
ij
and the principal strains c
1,2,3
, are as
follows:
Absolute Maximum Principal: The Absolute Maximum Principal strain is defined as the
principal strain with the largest magnitude:
Signed von Mises: The Signed von Mises strain is the von Mises strain, but forced to take the
sign of the Absolute Maximum Principal strain, i.e.:
Signed Shear: The Signed Shear strain is the Maximum Shear strain (Tresca Criterion) forced
to take the sign of the Absolute Maximum Principal strain. A factor is applied to ensure that the
parameter has the same value as the Absolute Maximum Principal strain under uniaxial loading
conditions.
Critical Plane: The Critical Plane option is available only for stresses/strains flagged as 2-D.
The normal strain is calculated and rainflow counted on multiple planes. The critical plane is the
plane with the most predicted fatigue damage. The planes on which the normal strain is
determined have normals that lie in the plane of the physical surface, i.e., in the x-y plane of the
2-D stress or strain results coordinate system. The orientation of each plane is defined by the
angle | made with the local x-axis.
m
n
S ( ) S

}
f ( ) f
n
df =
c
AMP
c
3
= if c
3
c
1
> otherwi se c
AMP
c
1
=
c
SVM
c
AMP
c
AMP
-----------------
1
1 v
e
+ ( ) 2
---------------------------- c
1
c
2
( )
2
c
2
c
3
( )
2
c
3
c
1
( )
2
+ + =
c
SSh
c
AMP
c
AMP
-----------------
c
1
c
3
( )
1 v
e
+ ( )
---------------------- =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
62

The strain on each plane is calculated from
| can take the values 0, 10, 20, 30, 170 degrees.
Strain Hardening
See glossary term Cyclic Hardening.
Strain-Life (c-N)
c
|
c
xx
c
yy
+
2
----------------------
c
xx
c
yy
2
---------------------- + 2| c
xy
2| sin + cos =
Main Index
63
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
This is a fatigue life prediction method commonly referred to as crack initiation, or local strain. It
only concerns itself with the initiation of a crack. The method is called strain-life because it relates
local strain to life. It is a fairly recent and well accepted method of fatigue life prediction brought about
by the work of many but principally the Americans, Manson and Coffin in the mid 1950s. This work
would not have been possible without the invention of the servo-hydraulic test machine. These machines
allowed strains to be precisely controlled as opposed to stresses which are near impossible to control.
Because of this the scatter in material data for the strain-life method is much less than that of the S-N
method and a more accurate prediction of fatigue life can be made.
The Coffin-Manson-Basquin formula defines the relationship between strain amplitude c
a
and the
number of cycles to failure N
f
:
(2-1)
Graphically, it looks like:
Fatigue damage is predicted in the same way as for the S-N method the damage due to an individual
cycle is calculated by looking up the strain amplitude of that cycle on the curve to find the number of
reversals to failure 2N
f
. The damage assigned to that cycle is then 1/N
f
.
If the life N
f
corresponding to a particular cycle is greater than the cutoff Nc, zero damage is predicted.
Ne is an endurance limit. The main application for this is in the consideration of surface finish.
The basic operation of a standard c-N analysis can be summarized in the following diagram:
c
o
f
'
E
------- 2N
f
( )
b
c
f
' 2N
f
( )
c
+ =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
64
A typical c-N analysis has the following basic steps, which are executed for each analysis entity (Node,
Element, Node-on-Element), shell surface and critical plane where appropriate.
1. The strain tensor history, as a function of time or data points, is assembled from the information
provided in the load provider. This applies to time-series, time step, constant amplitude, duty
cycle and hybrid load providers. In most cases, the strains are linear elastic strains at this point.
2. From the strain tensor (still elastic), extract a combined strain parameter (Abs Max Principal,
Signed von Mises, Signed Shear, Critical Plane, etc.).
3. Rainflow count the combined strain history to obtain a list of rainflow cycles, at the same time
estimating the total local strain (elastic-plastic) using a notch rule (e.g., Neubers rule) and
tracking the shape and position of each hysteresis loop. This procedure is called a tracking
rainflow count. This more complex rainflow procedure is necessary because the local strain
approach requires that we know the total (elastic-plastic) strain range for each cycle, and often we
also require the mean or maximum stress of each cycle too.
4. Calculate and accumulate damage from c-N curve definitions, using linear damage accumulation
(Miners rule).
Strain Softening
See glossary term Cyclic Softening.
Strain vs. Stress
See glossary term Stress vs. Strain.
Stress Combination
For all cyclic loads in the time domain the fatigue analysis engine creates a stress tensor history, o
ij
(t). In
order to make a fatigue calculation, we need to reduce this stress tensor to a scalar value, so that we can
Main Index
65
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
cycle count it and compare the resulting cycles to an S-N curve or curves. This process is called stress
combination. The available options for combined stress damage parameters are:
Abs Max Principal
Signed von Mises
Signed Shear
Critical Plane
In general, a stress tensor has 9 components, but due to symmetry, this reduces to 6.
However, the majority of fatigue cracks initiate at free surfaces. At a free surface, we can assume that
there is no direct or shear stress applied to the surface. This means that if we choose an appropriate
Cartesian coordinate system - one where the z-axis is a surface normal - all stress components containing
a z disappear and we are left with a stress tensor with only 3 non-zero components.
See the glossary term on Surface Resolved Stresses for details of surface resolution. If the stresses are
resolved to the plane of the surface, the zz, yz and zx stress components will be ignored (assumed to be
zero). 2-D stresses may be processed more quickly.
Most of the combination methods require the determination of principal stresses. The principal stresses
are the eigenvalues of the stress tensor matrix.
In the case of 2-D stresses, the calculation of the 2 in-plane principal stresses reduces to the solution of
a quadratic:
The third principal in this case is the surface normal stress, which is always zero.
Whether the stress tensor is flagged as 2-D or 3-D, the result is three principal stresses o
1,2,3
which are
ordered so that o
1
o
2
o
3
. These are useful for calculating the other combined stress options as follows.
Absolute Maximum Principal: The absolute maximum principal stress is defined as the
principal stress with the largest magnitude:
o
i j
o
xx
o
xy
o
zx
o
xy
o
yy
o
yz
o
zx
o
yz
o
zz
o
i j
o
xx
o
xy
0
o
xy
o
yy
0
0 0 0
o
pri nci pal
o
xx
o
yy
+
2
------------------------
o
xx
o
yy
2
------------------------
\ .
| |
2
o
xy
2
+ =
o
AMP
o
3
= if o
3
o
1
otherwise o
AMP
> o
1
=
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
66
Signed von Mises: The signed von Mises stress is the von Mises stress, but forced to take the
sign of the Absolute Maximum Principal stress, i.e.,
Signed Shear: The Signed Shear stress is the Maximum Shear stress (Tresca Criterion), forced
to take the sign of the Absolute Maximum Principal stress. A factor of 2 is applied to ensure that
the parameter has the same value as the Absolute Maximum Principal stress under uniaxial
loading conditions.
Critical Plane: The critical plane option is available only for stresses flagged as 2-D. The
normal stress is calculated and rainflow counted on multiple planes. The critical plane is the
plane with the most predicted fatigue damage. The planes on which the normal stress is
determined have normals that lie in the plane of the physical surface, i.e., in the x-y plane of the
2-D stress results coordinate system. The orientation of each plane is defined by the angle |
made with the local x-axis. See glossary term Critical Plane Analysis.
The stress on each plane is calculated from:
| can take the values 0, 10, 20, 30, 170 degrees.
Maximum Principal: Maximum principal is the maximum principal stress o
1
. It may be
smaller in magnitude than the minimum principal stress and should be used with caution. If the
three principal stresses are o
1
, o
2,
o
3
where o
1
> o
2
> o
3,
this is o
1
. Use with caution as this
isn't a recommended damage parameter.
von Mises: This is the von Mises stress where o
1
, o
2
, o
3
are the three principal stresses. It is
always positive (not signed by the absolute maximum principal stress) and should be used with
caution.
Shear: The shear stress is the Maximum Shear stress (Tresca Criterion), i.e., o
sh
=o
1
-o
3
where o
1
, o
2
, o
3
are the three principal stresses and o
1
> o
2
> o
3
. A factor of 2 is applied to
be consistent with the Signed Shear parameter. This is always positive and is not recommended
as a damage parameter.
o
SVM
o
AMP
o
AMP
------------------
o
1
o
2
( )
2
o
2
o
3
( )
2
o
3
o
1
( )
2
+ +
2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ =
o
SSh
o
AMP
o
AMP
------------------ o
1
o
3
( ) =
o
|
o
xx
o
yy
+
2
------------------------
o
xx
o
yy
2
------------------------ 2| o
xy
2| sin + cos + =
o
VM
o
1
o
2
( )
2
o
2
o
3
( )
2
o
3
o
1
( )
2
+ +
2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ =
Main Index
67
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Stress Concentration Factor, K
t
This is a factor which relates stress at one point in a structure to stress at another point. For example, the
stress concentration factor for a large plate with a hole is three (3). This relates the nominal stress (P/A)
at an area away from the hole to the stress at the radius of the hole. Concentration factors have come
about due to the fact that it is difficult to place a measurement device directly on the highest stressed area.
Therefore some factor had to be established to convert measured response to actual responses at critical
locations. In FE fatigue based analysis, K
t
is generally taken as unity (1), since in this case we do know
the stress at the critical area. In fact we know the local stress at all locations.
Stress Intensity
In simplistic terms, this is the driving force that causes a crack to propagate forward. It controls the stress
around a crack tip and is know as K (not to be confused with K
t
or K
f
, the stress and fatigue concentration
factors). When the magnitude of K reaches the fracture toughness of a material, failure occurs. K is a
function of the crack length, a, the nominal or far field stress away from the crack, and other geometric
dimensions of the component or structure and has units of stress-length
1/2
.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
68
Stress-Life (S-N)
This is a fatigue life prediction method commonly referred to as total life because it does not make a
distinction between initiating or propagating a crack but instead considers only the total life of the
component until failure into two or more pieces. The method is called stress-life because it relates
nominal or local stress to life. It was the first method of fatigue life prediction conceived by the German,
August Woehler in the late 1800s due to his work in the railway industry. His famous rotating-bending
tests gave rise to the concept of the S-N curve. These curves are generally denoted in log units and some
materials exhibit a fatigue limit, a stress level below which no fatigue failures will occur.
The standard S-N curve consists of 3 linear segments on a log-log plot. The central section has the
formula where N
f
is the number of cycles to failure. Ao SRI1 N
f
( )
b
1
=
Main Index
69
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
NC1 defines the point on the curve where it transitions to the second slope b2. If b2 is set to zero, this
acts as a fatigue limit.
At lives of less than 1000 cycles, the slope of the curve may be modified to take into account the
limitation in fatigue strength imposed by the static strength of the material, so that, at a life of 1 cycle,
the maximum stress is equal to the UTS.
The fatigue cutoff is a numerical limit, normally set at around 1E30 cycles. It has no physical
interpretation.
The basic operation of the standard S-N analysis can be summarized in the following diagram.
Figure 2-1 Basic S-N analysis engine steps
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
70
A typical S-N analysis has the following basic steps, which are executed for each analysis entity (Node,
Element, Node-on-Element), shell surface and critical plane where appropriate.
1. The stress tensor history, as a function of time or data points, is assembled from the information
provided in the load provider. This applies to time-series, time step, constant amplitude and
hybrid load providers.
2. From the stress tensor, extract a combined stress parameter (Abs Max Principal, Signed von
Mises, Signed Shear or Critical Plane).
3. Rainflow count the combined stress history to obtain a list of rainflow cycles, each with a known
range and mean value.
4. Calculate and accumulate damage from S-N curve definitions.
Smith-Watson-Topper (STW) Mean Stress
This is a mechanism to correct for non-zero mean stress for the strain-life method. See glossary term
Mean Stress Correction.
Stress-Strain Relationship
The local strain (c-N) approach requires that the cyclic stress-strain behavior be modelled. This requires
that we know the relationship between stress amplitude and strain amplitude (cyclic stress-strain curve),
and how to predict the shape of hysteresis loops. The uniaxial cyclic stress strain curve is modelled using
a Ramberg-Osgood relationship.
Masings hypothesis is used to predict the shape of each hysteresis loop by doubling the size of the cyclic
stress-strain curve.
The relationship between the two curves is illustrated below.
c
a
o
a
E
------
o
a
K'
------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
Ac
Ao
E
------- 2
Ao
2K'
---------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ =
Main Index
71
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
If SEc > 0, then the design criterion (certainty of survival) will also adjust the stress strain behavior as
follows, based on the number of standard errors from the mean:
The effects of this adjustment can be counter-intuitive, particularly when the Smith-Watson-Topper
method is being used. It is probably best to leave SEc set to 0.
Stress vs. Strain
Note that c-N calculations may be based on linear stresses or linear strains from the finite element (FE)
analysis. If stresses o
ij
are used, they have to be converted to linear strains c
ij
at the beginning of the
calculation, using Hookes Law.
Ac
Ao
E
------- 2
Ao
2K'
---------
\ .
| |
1
n'
-----
+ 10
zSEc
=
c
xx
o
xx
E
--------
v
e
E
----- o
yy
o
zz
+ ( ) =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
72
Where
G is the shear modulus and v
e
is the elastic Poisson ratio.
Note that when 2-D linear strains are obtained from shell elements, the out-of-plane z-strains are
frequently not calculated by the FE code. However, it is not correct to assume that these are zero. In these
circumstances the out-of-plane strain is calculated from the in-plane strains and the Poisson ratio as
follows:
Surface Finish/Treatment
Surface finish and treatment can have a significant effect on fatigue behavior. Rough surface finishes,
e.g., due to machining marks, will in general reduce the fatigue strength, whereas surface treatments are
often applied to increase the fatigue strength.
Surface finish and treatment effects are modelled in the S-N and c-N analysis by means of a single surface
factor K
sur
. This works in a different way from the Scale Factor and Offset described above, with which
it should not be confused. The Surface Factor is used to adjust the material curve. The application is
slightly different for the S-N and c-N methods, but the basic principal is the same the surface factor is
applied to the fatigue strength of the material in the high cycle (long-life) regime, but the effect reduces
in the low cycle (short-life) regime.
Standard S-N curves are modified by changing the slope and intercept of the central portion of
the S-N curve so that the fatigue strength is reduced by a factor K
sur
at life Nc1 (the transition
life), but remains the same for life 1000 cycles.
Bastenaire data is modified by multiplying the Bastenaire fatigue limit parameter EB by K
sur

resulting in shifting the curve.
For all the other S-N options, that is multiple mean, multiple R-ratio, or Haigh curves, all the
stress values (Amplitude, Range or Max stress) are multiplied by a factor, say K
sur
which is a
function of K
sur
and the life value N
f
corresponding to the stress value.
For N
f
1E3, K
sur
= 1.0
For N
f
Ne, K
sur
= K
sur
For 1E3 < N
f
< Ne, K
sur
is interpolated logarithmically as follows:
c
yy
o
yy
E
--------
v
e
E
----- o
zz
o
xx
+ ( ) =
c
zz
o
zz
E
--------
v
e
E
----- o
xx
o
yy
+ ( ) =
c
xy

xy
2
-------
o
xy
2G
-------- = = G
E
2 1 v
e
+ ( )
----------------------- =
c
zz
v
e
c
xx
c
yy
+ ( )
1 v
e
------------------------------------ =
Main Index
73
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
K
sur
is the product of three factors, which can be defined via the material map. Each of these has default
value 1.
K
sur
= (KTreatment) x (KUser) x (KRoughness)
KTreatment - A factor used to adjust the fatigue strength to take into account surface treatment.
A factor > 1 will result in an improvement in fatigue strength.
KUser - A factor used to adjust the fatigue strength for any unspecified reason. A factor > 1 will
result in an improvement in fatigue strength.
KRoughness - defined in three different ways, depending on the setting of the Surface
Roughness Type.The roughness factor normally provides an indication of the fatigue strength
relative to a polished surface condition, but in practice it is relative to whatever the surface
condition of the material was on the specimens used to derive the material properties. The three
methods for creating a surface roughness factor (KRoughness) are:
Descriptive - if one of the surface roughness descriptions is selected (Polished, Ground,
Machined etc.) the FKM method described above will be applied, using one of a number of
pre-set values for the surface roughness R
Z
. The values are given in the following table:
K
sur
' =10
K
sur
3 N
f
log ( ) 3 N
e
log ( ) log
Modifications of standard S-N curves to
take into account surface condition.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
74
Enter Roughness Factor - if Surface Roughness Type = Enter Roughness Factor, the Surface
Roughness Factor KRoughness (K
R
) may be set directly, e.g., based on the users experience,
or on experimental evidence.
Enter Surface Roughness - if Surface Roughness Type = Enter Surface Roughness, the user
should enter a value for the Surface Roughness R
z
in m. This is the average surface
roughness according the German standard DIN 4768. The Surface Roughness Factor K
R
will
then be calculated, based on the strength and type of material (for example, stronger materials
are in general more sensitive to surface finish, and cast materials less so). The method for
calculating K
R
is taken from the FKM Guideline Analytical strength assessment of
components in mechanical engineering.
If R
z
1 m, K
R
= 1.
Otherwise:
K
R
= 1-a
R
.log(R
Z
).log(2R
m
/R
m,N,min
)
R
m
is the UTS in MPa
R
m,N,min
and a
R
are constants.
Values of the constants are a function of the type of material and the UTS. They are defined
in the following table. In order for the calculation to work, the material type number must be
defined in the material data set, and must be one of the type numbers specified in the table.
Table 2-3 Surface Roughness (R
Z
) Values Corresponding to Surface Finish
Descriptors
Condition R
Z
(m)
Polished 0
Ground 12.5
Machined 100
Poor machined 200
As rolled 200
As cast 200
Main Index
75
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
GS = cast steel and heat treatable cast steel, for general purposes
GG = cast iron with lamellar graphite (grey cast iron)
GGG = nodular cast iron
GT = malleable cast iron
In the case of the c-N method, the effect of the surface condition is modelled by changing the slope of
the elastic part of the strain-life curve so that the fatigue strength at the endurance limit Ne is reduced by
the surface factor.
If the surface factor is denoted K
sur
, the modified slope b is calculated from:
Table 2-4 Constants for Derivation of Surface Roughness Factor K
R
from Roughness R
z
.
Material Steel GS GGG GT GG
Wrought
Al alloys
Cast Al
alloys
Material type
number (CODE)
13,14,16-
22-25,26-
99
9-12,15 5-8 2-4 1 100-105 106
a
R
.22 .20 .16 .12 .06 .22 .20
R
m,N,min
/MPa 400 400 400 350 100 133 133
b' b
K
sur
( ) log
Ne ( ) log
------------------------ =
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
76
Note that if Ne is not defined, the fatigue cutoff Nc will be used instead.
Surface Resolved Stresses
Surface resolved stresses are the stress on the surface of a structure or component which is said to be in
a state of plane stress. The two principal stresses are in the plane of the surface while the third principal
which is normal to the surface is zero. Finite element shell element models produce surface resolved
stresses by default. However many solid element models produce stress results in elemental coordinate
systems and need to be transformed into surface resolved stresses. Surface resolved stresses are needed
to correctly calculate biaxiality ratios and perform multiaxial assessments.
Time History Compression
The time taken to run a fatigue analysis is a function of the number of entities (nodes and elements), load
cases (for superposition events), the type of analysis (E-N is somewhat slower than S-N) and for time-
series loadings, the number of data points in the time series. One way of reducing the time taken to run
an analysis is to reduce the number of data points to be processed. A means of doing this that applies to
time-series only, is peak-valley compression. In effect, this provides the option of reducing the number
of points in the time-series inputs before linear superposition.
Consider the simple example below. Peak valley extraction reduces the time history to seven turning
points. At the same time, the time history is rainflow cycle counted, and any cycles that have ranges less
than a specified Gate value are discarded (LOAD option). The Gate value can be expressed either as an
absolute value in the same units as the time history, or as a percentage of the maximum range of the time
history.
For example, in the time history illustrated, we might use a gate value of 25%. First, the points labelled
1 to 7 are identified as turning points, and the rest are discarded. Rainflow Cycle Counting this history
identifies 3 cycles, formed by:
Points 1 and 4 a range of 25 (in whatever units)
Points 2 and 3 a range of 10
Points 5 and 6 a range of 6
Because they are associated with a cycle that has a range of less than 25% of the maximum range, points
5 and 6 are also discarded.
Main Index
77
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Finally, the list of turning points processed looks like this.Note that the horizontal axis is now points and
not time:
When multiple channels are processed, it is important to maintain the synchronization between channels.
For this reason, when multiple channels are processed, after the peak-valley points to be retained in each
channel have been identified, the corresponding points in time from all other channels are also retained,
whether or not they are turning points. Fewer points will in general be discarded than would be the case
for a single channel.
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
78
Note that when setting the value of the cycle gate, there is a trade-off between the speed of processing
and accuracy. The bigger the gate value, the more potentially damaging cycles may be removed.
Note also that it is possible in certain circumstances that using this feature may eliminate the most
damaging loads from the loading history. For example, consider a simple example a cantilever beam
loaded in combined tension-compression and bending, where the tension and bending have similar stress
levels at the root of the beam, with sinusoidal loading and a 90 degree phase difference. The result is
illustrated in below. This shows the contributions to the stress from bending and tension-compression,
and the combined stress. The black crosses indicate the data points that are retained by peak valley
slicing, and the black line represents the combined stress that will be calculated after peak valley slicing.
In this case, the use of peak-valley slicing will result in an attenuation of the peak stress of about 40%.
This example represents a worst case scenario. If loading histories are represented by out-of-phase sine
waves (which might be the case in simulating a rotating shaft, for example), it would be advisable not to
use time history compression. However, in the majority of cases with multiple load cases and variable
amplitude loadings, peak valley slicing provides a very useful way of reducing analysis times without
great loss of accuracy.
If in doubt, configure a second analysis run with no time-history compression, which re-analyzes the
most critical entities from the first run.
Main Index
79
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Using the FAST option gives a much greater degree of data reduction, rather like applying peak valley
extraction with a gate of 99.99%. Compression is applied, which retains the points corresponding to the
maximum and minimum values of each channel (time history), including the corresponding points from
all the other channels. It approximates the worst cycle, but discards many other damaging cycles. This
method is really only intended to be used as a way of identifying the most highly stressed regions of a
structure for more accurate analysis in a subsequent run.
When running a duty cycle, time compression operates on each event in the duty cycle independently.
Total Life
See glossary term Stress-Life (S-N).
Transfer Function
A Transfer Function is a way of relating one quantity to another. In the frequency domain the structure
is modeled by a linear Transfer Function relating input loads to output responses. The output from the
model is expressed as a PSD. In frequency response analysis these Transfer Functions are determined by
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
80
subjecting the model at the input load point to a series of sine waves with unit amplitude over the
frequency range of interest. Multiplying the input PSD of load by the Transfer Function then gives the
response PSD.
Uniaxial
This is the stress state of a component or location in a component where only one principal stress exists,
all others being zero. The biaxiality ratio, a
e
, defined as the minimum in-plane stress divided by the
maximum in-plane stress (for surface stresses), is zero in this case. The principal stress is also stationary;
that is, the principal stress is always in the same direction and not rotating such as a rod in tension.
White Noise
White noise is a signal which contains frequency content from all frequencies and when converted to the
frequency domain, is a constant line. A sharp sudden impact is also a form of signal which contains
content at all frequencies.
Wide Band
Wide band is a signal which contains frequency content at more than one frequency which when
converted to the frequency domain can appear as multiple spikes or as a broad curve spanning multiple
frequencies.
PSD
input
TF PSD
response
=
Main Index
81
APPENDIX B
Glossary of Terms
Main Index
Glossary of Terms
82
Main Index
Ap. C: References and Further Reading
C
References and Further Reading
References
Further Reading
Main Index
References
84
References
1. Steel, Concrete, and Composite Bridges, Part 10, Code of Practice for Fatigue, British
Standards Institution, BS5400, ISBN 0-580-10567-9, 1980.
2. Peterson, R.E., Stress Concentration Factors, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1974, ISBN 0-
471-68329-9.
3. Rooke and Cartwright, D. J., A Compendium of Stress Intensity Factors, HMSO, 1974.
4. Murakame, Y., (Editor-in-Chief), Stress Intensity Factors Handbook, Pergamon Press, 1987.
5. James, L. A. and Mills, W. J., Eng. Fract. Mech., Volume 30, No.5, 1988, page 641.
6. Gray, T. J. F., Int. Jnl. Fract., Volume 13, No.1, 1977, page 65.
7. Newman, J. C. Jr. and Raju, I. S., ASTM STP 791, ASTM, 1983, page I-238.
8. Walker, E. F. and May, M. J., BISRA Open Report No. MG/E/307/67, 1967.
9. Lipson, C., and Juvinall, R. C., Handbook of Stress and Strength Design and Material
Applications, Macmillan & Co., New York 1963.
10. Paris, P. C., Gomez, R. E., and Anderson, W. E., The Trend in Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 1, Jan
1961.
11. Forman, R. G., Kearney, V. E., and Engle, R. M., Jnl. Basic Eng., Vol 89, 1967, p459.
12. Klesnil, M. and Lukas, P., Matl. Sci. Jnl., Vol 9, 1972, page 231.
13. Austen, I. M. and Walker, E. F., Proc. Int. Conf. Steel in Marine Structures, Delft, Netherlands,
June 1987, (Elsevier), page 859.
14. Austen, I. M. and Walker, E. F., Proc. Int. Conf. Fatigue '87, Charlottesville, VA., USA,
(EMAS), page 1155.
15. Austen, I. M. and Walker, E. F., Proc. Int. Conf. Influence of Environment on Fatigue, London,
UK, May 1977, (I. Mech. E.), page 1.
16. Austen, I. M., et al, A Review of Fatigue Crack Growth Characterization by Linear Elastic
Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) Part 3 Corrosion Fatigue, (British Steel/The Welding Institute),
1989.
17. Austen, I. M. and Walker, E. F., Proc. Int. Conf. Offshore Structures, Cambridge, UK, Nov.
1978, (DEn/CEC).
18. Webster, S. E., Austen, I. M., and Rudd, W. J., Fatigue, Corrosion Fatigue, and Stress Corrosion
of Steels for Offshore Structures, ECSC Contract 7210.KG/801, Final Report, (HMSO), April
1984.
19. Webster, S. E., Austen, I. M., and Rudd, W. J., The Fatigue and Stress Corrosion Properties of
Conventional and Higher Strength Steels for Use in Offshore Environments, ECSC Contract
7210.KG/802, Final Report, (HMSO), July 1988.
20. Austen, I.M., Quantitative Understanding of Corrosion Fatigue Crack Growth Behaviour,
ECSC Contract 7210.KE/806, Final Report, (HMSO), July 1982.
21. Austen, I. M., Quantitative Assessment of Corrosion Fatigue Crack Growth Under Variable
Amplitude Loading, ECSC Contract 7210.KE/810, Final Report, (HMSO), July 1987.
Main Index
85
APPENDIX C
22. Garwood, S. J., and Boulton, C. F., Cumulative Damage to Welded Steel Structures, ECSC
Contract 6210.KD/8/801, Final Report, (HMSO), Sept. 1979.
23. Willenborg, J. D., Engle, R. M., Wood, H. A., Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Report
TM-71-1-FBR, Wright-Patterson Airbase, USA, 1971.
24. Johnson, W. S., Methods and Models for Predicting Fatigue Crack Growth Under Random
Loading, ASTM STP 748, 1981, (ASTM), page 85.
25. Elber, W., Fatigue Crack Growth Under Spectrum Loads, ASTM STP 595, 1976, (ASTM),
page 236.
26. Neuber, H. (1961) Theory of stress concentration for shear strained prismatic bodies with
arbitrary nonlinear stress-strain law. Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 28, pp. 544-551.
27. Hoffmann, M. and Seeger, T. (1989) Estimating multi-axial elastic-plastic notch stresses and
strains in combined loading. Biaxial and Multi-axial Fatigue, EGF3. Edited by M. W. Brown
and K. J. Miller, MEP, pp. 3-24.
28. Hoffmann, M. and Seeger, T. (1989) Stress-strain analysis and life predictions of a notched shaft
under multi-axial loading. Multi-axial Fatigue, Analysis and Experiments, AE-14. Edited by G.
E. Leese and D. Socie, SAE Inc., pp. 81-96.
29. Klann, D. A., Tipton, S. M. and Cordes, T. S. (1993) Notch stress and strain estimation
considering multi-axial constraint. SAE Technical Paper 930401.
30. Dittmann, K. J. (1991) Ein Beitrag zur Festigkeitsberechnung un Lebensdauer fur Bauteile das
Stahl unter mehrachsiger synchroner Beanspruchung. PhD Dissertation, TU Berlin.
31. Seeger, T. and Beste, A. (1977) Zur Weiterentwicklung von Nherungsformeln fur die
Berechnung von Kerbbeanspruchungen im elastisch-plastischen Bereich. VDI-
Fortschrittsberichte, Reihe 18, Nr. 2, Dusseldorf.
32. Rupp, A., Strzel, K. and Grubisic, V. Computer Aided Dimensioning of Spot-Welded
Automotive Structures. SAE Technical Paper 950711, 1995.
33. Smith, R. A. and Cooper, J. F. Theoretical predictions of the fatigue life of shear spot welds.
Fatigue of Welded Structures, Ed. S. J. Maddox, pp. 287 - 293, The Welding Institute, 1988.
34. British Standards Institution. Code of Practice for Fatigue Design and Assessment of Steel
Structures. BS 7608, 1993.
35. Radaj, D. Local Fatigue Strength Characteristic Values for Spot Welded Joints. Engineering
Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 245 - 250, 1990.
36. Sheppard, S. D. and Strange, M. E. Fatigue Life Estimation in Resistance Spot Welds: Initiation
and Early Growth Phase. Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, Vol.
15, No. 6, pp. 531 - 549, 1992.
37. Sheppard, S. D. Estimation of Fatigue Propagation Life in Resistance Spot Welds. ASTM STP
1211, Advances in Fatigue Life Prediction Techniques, M. R. Mitchell and R. W. Landgraf, Eds.,
pp. 169 - 185, ASTM Philadelphia, 1993.
38. Heyes, P., Dakin, J. and StJohn, C. The Assessment and Use of Linear Static FE Stress Analyses
for Durability Calculations. SAE Technical Paper 951101, 1995.
Main Index
References
86
39. A.K.Khosrovaneh and N.E.Dowling Fatigue Loading History Reconstruction based on the
Rainflow Technique. International Journal of Fatigue,Vol 12 no. 2 pp90-106
40. J.Kowalewski On the relationship between Component Life Under Irregularity Fluctuating and
Ordered Load Sequences. Part 2, DVL Report 249
41. Thomson, W. T., "Theory of Vibration with Applications", 2nd Edition, George Alle and Unwin,
1981.
42. Newland, D. E., "An Introduction to Random Vibrations and Spectral Analysis", 2nd Edition,
Longman, 1986.
43. Cooley, J. W., and J. W. Tukey, "An algorithm for the Machine Calculation of Complex Fourier
Series", Math. Comput., 19 (April 1965): 297.
44. "Programs for Digital Signal Processing", Published by IEEE, 1979.
45. Mrz Z., (1967), On the Description of Anisotropic Work Hardening, Journal of Mechanics and
Physics of Solids, vol. 15, pp. 163-175
46. Garud Y. S., (1981), A New Approach to the Evaluation of Fatigue under Multiaxial Loading,
Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, vol. 103, pp. 118-125
47. Wang C. H. and Brown M. W., (1996), Life Prediction Techniques for Variable Amplitude
Multiaxial Fatigue - Part 1: Theories, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, vol.
118, pp. 367-370
48. Wang C. H. and Brown M. W., (1996), Life Prediction Techniques for Variable Amplitude
Multiaxial Fatigue - Part 2: Comparison with Experimental Results, Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology, vol. 118, pp. 371-374
49. Heyes P. J., Milsted M. G. and Dakin J., (1996), Multiaxial Fatigue Assessment of Automotive
Chassis Components on the basis of Finite-Element Models, Multiaxial Fatigue and Design,
ESIS 21 (Edited by A. Pineau, G. Cailletaud and T. C. Lindley) MEP London, pp. 461-475
50. Heyes P., Dakin J. and St.john C., (1995), The Assessment and Use of Linear Static FE Stress
Analyses for Durability Calculations, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on
Vehicle Structural Mechanics and CAE, pp. 189-199
51. Heyes P. and Fermr M., (1996), A Program for the Fatigue Analysis of Automotive Spot-Welds
Based on Finite Element Calculations, Proceedings of the Symposium on International
Automotive Technology, SAE Technical Paper 962507
52. Basquin O. H., (1910), The Exponential Law of Endurance Tests, Proceedings of the American
Society for Testing Materials, vol. 10, pp. 625-630
53. Manson S. S., (1953), Behaviour of Materials under Conditions of Thermal Stress, Heat
Transfer Symposium, University of Michigan Engineering Research Institute, pp. 9-75
54. Coffin L. F., (1954), The Problem of Thermal Stress Fatigue in Austenitic Steels at Elevated
Temperatures, ASTM STP No. 165, p.31
55. Coffin L. F., (1954), A Study of the Effects of Cyclic Thermal Stresses on a Ductile Metal,
Trans. American Society for Testing and Materials, vol. 76, pp. 931-950
56. Matsuishi M. and Endo T., (1968), Fatigue of Metals Subjected to Varying Stress, Presented to
Kyushu District Meeting, JSME.
Main Index
87
APPENDIX C
57. Miner M. A., (1945), Cumulative Damage in Fatigue, Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 12,
pp. A159-A164
58. HBM United Kingdom Limited (HBM), nCode 8 (including GlyphWorks, Automation
Personal Edition and DesignLife (2012), software manuals
59. Glinka G. and Buczynski A., (1997), Elastic-Plastic Stress-Strain Analysis of Notches under
Non-Proportional Cyclic Loading Paths, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Biaxial/Multiaxial Fatigue and Fracture, Krakow, Poland
60. Chu C. C., (1989), A Three-Dimensional Model of Anisotropic Hardening in Metals and its
Application to the Analysis of Sheet Metal Formability, Journal of Mechanics and Physics of
Solids, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 197-212
61. Armstrong P. J. and Frederic C. O., (1966), A Mathematical Representation of the Multiaxial
Bauschinger Effect, CEGB Report RD/B/M731, Berkeley Nuclear Laboratories
62. Wang C. H. and Brown M. W., (1993), Inelastic Deformation and Fatigue under Complex
Loading, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor
Technology, vol. L, pp. 159-170
63. Wang C. H. and Brown M. W., (1993), A Path-Independent Parameter for Fatigue under
Proportional and Non-Proportional Loading, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and
Structures, vol. 16, pp. 1285-1298
64. Brown M. W., Suker D. K. and Wang C. H., (1996), An Analysis of Mean Stress in Multiaxial
Random Fatigue, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, vol. 19, no. 2/3,
pp. 323-333
65. Bannantine J. A., (1989), A Variable Amplitude Multiaxial Fatigue Life Prediction Method,
PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
66. Smith K. N., Watson P. and Topper T. H., (1970), A Stress-Strain function for the Fatigue of
Metals, Journal of Materials, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 767-778
67. Fatemi A. and Socie D. F., (1988), A Critical Plane Approach to Multiaxial Fatigue Damage
Including Out-of-Phase Loading, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures,
vol. 11, no. 3, pp.149-165
68. Dreler K., Kttgen V. B. and Ktzle H., (1995), Tools for Fatigue Evaluation of Non-
Proportional Loading, Proceedings of Fatigue Design 1995 (Edited by Gary Marquis and Jussi
Solin), vol. 1, pp. 261-277
69. Andrzej Buczynski and Grzegorz Glinka (1997), "Elastic-Plastic Stress-Strain Analysis of
Notches under Non-Proportional Loading," Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Biaxial/Multiaxial Fatigue and Fracture, Cracow, Poland, Sept. 97.
70. Diboine, A. (1996) Fatigue Assessment of Components under Complex Loadings, Multiaxial
Fatigue and Design, ESIS 21, Mechanical Engineering Publications, London, pp. 425-443.
71. McDiarmid, D.L. (1991) A General Criterion for High Cycle Multiaxial Fatigue Failure, Fatigue
and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures. Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 429-453.
Main Index
References
88
72. McDiarmid, D.L. (1994) A Shear Stress based Critical-Plane Criterion of Multiaxial Fatigue
Failure for Design and Life Prediction, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and
Structures. Vol. 17, No. 12, pp. 1475-1484.
73. Dang Van, K., Cailletaud, G., Flavenot, J.F., le Douaron, A., Lieurade, H.P. (1989) Criterion
for High Cycle Fatigue Failure Under Multiaxial Loading, Biaxial and Multiaxial Fatigue, EGF
3, Mechanical Engineering Publications, London, pp. 459-478.
74. Dang Van, K., Griveau, B., Message, O. (1989) On a New Multiaxial Fatigue Limit Criterion:
Theory and Application, Biaxial and Multiaxial Fatigue, EGF 3, Mechanical Engineering
Publications, London, pp. 479-496.
75. D.E.Newland, An introduction to random vibrations and spectral analysis (2nd edition), Longman
Inc., New York, (1984).
76. N W M Bishop, Dynamic fatigue response of deepwater offshore structures subjected to random
loading, Structural Engineering Review SER, 76/11, 63-78, (1991).
77. N W M Bishop and F Sherratt, Fatigue life prediction from power spectral density data. Part 1,
traditional approaches and Part 2, recent developments. Environmental Engineering, 2,(1989).
78. P.H.Wirsching and M.C.Light, Fatigue under wide band random loading, J Struct. Div., ASCE,
1593-1607, (1980).
79. G.K.Chaudhury and W.D.Dover, Fatigue Analysis of Offshore Platforms Subject to Sea Wave
Loading, Int J Fatigue, 7, (1985).
80. J.C.P.Kam and W.D.Dover, Fast fatigue assessment procedure for offshore structures under
random stress history, Proc. Instn. Civ. Engrs., Part 2, 85, 689-700, (1988).
81. T.Dirlik, Application of computers in Fatigue Analysis, University of Warwick Thesis, (1985).
82. N.W.M.Bishop, The use of frequency domain parameters to predict structural fatigue, PhD thesis,
Warwick University, (1988).
83. I.Rychlik, A new definition of the rainflow cycle counting method, Int J Fatigue, 9, pp 119-121,
(1987).
84. N.W.M.Bishop and F.Sherratt, A theoretical solution for the estimation of rainflow ranges from
power spectral density data. Fat. Fract. Engng. Mater. Struct., 13, 311-326, (1990).
85. J.Kowalewski, On the relationship Between Component Life Under Irregularly Fluctuating and
Ordered Load sequences. Part 2, DVL Report 249, (1963).
86. P Bonfield and MP Ansell, Fatigue testing of wood composites for aerogenerator rotor blades.
Part V. Life Prediction and Hysteresis. Wind Energy Conversion, eds TD Davies et al. (1990)
87. N.W.M.Bishop and F.Sherratt, Signal processing for fatigue in both the time and frequency
domains, IMA Conference on Mathematics in the Automotive Industry, University of Warwick,
315-331, (1989).
88. N W M Bishop, Z Hu, R Wang and D Quarton, Methods for the rapid evaluation of fatigue
damage on the Howden HWP330 wind turbine, British Wind Energy Conference, York, (1993).
89. N.W.M.Bishop , F Sherratt and Hu Zhihua, The Analysis of Non-Gaussian Loadings from Wind
Turbine Blades Using Frequency Domain Techniques, British Wind Energy Conference 13,
Swansea, 317-321, (1991).
Main Index
89
APPENDIX C
90. N.W.M.Bishop and Hu Zhihua, The Fatigue Analysis of Wind Turbine Blades Using Frequency
Domain Techniques, European Wind Energy Conference, EWEC '91, Amsterdam, 246-250,
(1991).
91. K.A.Digre, L.K.Brasted and P.W.Marshall. The Design of The Bullwinkle Platform, Offshore
Technology Conference OTC # 6050, (1989).
92. D.I.Karsan. Design of Jackets in Deeper Gulf of Mexico Waters, Journal of Waterway, Port,
Coastal and Ocean Engineering, ASCE, 112, 427-446 (1986).
93. J.E.Dailey, D.I.Karsan and D.A.Kypke. Comparative Study of Offshore Structure Concepts For
Deepwater Applications, API North Pacific Section Meeting, Ventura, Calif, 1-19, (1979).
94. W.J. Pierson and L. Moskowitz. A Proposed Spectral Form For Fully Developed Wind Seas
Based on the Similarity Theory of S.A. Kitaigorodskii, Journal of Geophysical Research, 69,
(1964).
95. K.S. Bathe and E.L. Wilson. Solution Methods for Eigenvalue Problems in Structural Mechanics,
Int. J. Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2, (1973).
96. J M Tunna. Random load fatigue: theory and experiment. Proc Inst Mech Engrs 199(C3),
pp249-257,1985.
97. J M Tunna. Fatigue life prediction for gaissian random loads at the design stage. Fatigue Fact
Engng Mat Struct, 9(3), pp169-184, 1986.
98. Steinberg, D.S Vibration Analysis for Electronic Equipment. John Wiley and Sons, New York,
p223, 2nd edition, 1988.
99. So Rice, Mathematical Analysis of Random Noise, in selected papers on noise and stochastic
processes, (N.Wax, ed) Dover, New York 1956.
100. Kreyszig E. "Advanced Engineering Mathematics. Seventh Edition." John Wiley & Sons, inc.
101. Cooley, J.W and Tukey, J.W (1965). "An algorithm for the machine calculation of complex
Fourier series." Math. Comp., 19, 297-301.
102. Priestley M.B (1981). "Spectral Analysis and Time Series." Academic Press.
103. Spence P. "What is 'Power Spectral Density'?" The Analyst.
104. ESDU 85020 (1993). "Characteristics of atmospheric turbulence near the ground. Part II: single
point data for strong winds (neutral atmosphere)." ESDU international plc. 27 Corsham Street,
London, N1 6UA, England.
105. Newland D.E. (1993) "An introduction to Random vibrations, Spectral & Wavelet Analysis,
(Third edition)." Longman Scientific & Technical.
Main Index
Further Reading
90
Further Reading
1. Wohlers Experiments on the Fatigue of Metals, Engineering Editorial, March 24th, 1871,
p199 et seq.
2. Bannantine, Julie A., Comer, Jess J., and Handrock, James L., Fundamentals of Metal Fatigue
Analysis, Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-340191-X, 1990.
3. Fuchs, H.O., and Stephens, R.I., Metal Fatigue in Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-
471-052647, 1980.
4. Collins, J. A., Failure of Materials in Mechanical Design Analysis, Prediction, Prevention,
John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-471-05024-5, 1981.
5. Fatigue Under Complex Loading Analysis and Experiments, Society of Automotive
Engineering, SAE AE-6, 1974.
6. Hertzberg, R. W., and Manson, J. A., Fatigue of Engineering Plastics, Academic Press, ISBN
0-12-343550-1, 1980.
7. Multi-axial Fatigue Analysis and Experiments, Society of Automotive Engineering, SAE
AE-14, ISBN 0-89883-780-4, 1989.
8. Pickard, A. C., The Application of 3-Dimensional Finite Element Methods to Fracture
Mechanics and Fatigue Life Prediction, EMAS, ISBN 0-947817-22-0, 1986.
Main Index
MSC.Fatigue Quick Start Guide
I ndex
A
amplitude, 65, 10
analysis units, 44, 58, 102, 129
August Woehler, 10
auto spectral density, 4
B
Bastenaire, 21, 70, 11
Baushinger effect, 36
beta-solution, 11
biaxiality ratio, 12
broad band, 12
bulk data, 14, 102
DCONSTR, 196
DESGLB,DESGLB, 191
DESSUB,DESSUB, 191
DOPTPRM, 198, 200
DRESP1, 14, 46
DSCREEN, 196
DSCREEN,DSCREEN, 200
DTI UNITS, 14, 24, 44
FTGDEF, 14, 19
FTGEVNT, 14, 38
FTGLOAD, 14, 39
FTGPARM, 30
FTGSEQ, 14, 35
MATFTG, 14, 21
PFTG, 14, 27
TABLED1, 39, 62, 130, 149, 171
TABLEM1, 22, 59
TABLFTG, 14, 42
UDNAME, 14, 43
C
case control, 14, 16, 55, 83, 101, 128, 193
certainty of survival, 111
channel, 144
compliance, 11, 15
component S-N curve, 58, 15
condition, 144
constraints, 191, 196
crack growth, 9, 11, 15
crack growth rate, 22
crack initiation, 3, 11, 15
crack initiation analysis, 98
critical plane analysis, 33, 16
cycle counting, 30, 61, 80, 115, 16
cyclic hardening, 98, 105, 21
cyclic loading, 39, 42, 61, 83, 112, 195
cyclic loading, multiple loads, events, load
events, 130
cyclic material properties, 4, 21
cyclic softening, 98, 105, 22
cyclic stress-strain, 21
cyclic stress-strain curve, 103
D
da/dN curve, 22
DAC files, 43
damage, 23
damage response, 46
damage summation, 80, 87, 23
damage tolerant, 9, 24
DCONSTR, 196
derived material properties, 59
derived materials, 42
design constraints, 191, 196
design model, 195
design objective, 193, 201
design optimization, 46, 190
design philosophies, 8
design responses, 196
design variables, 195
DESOBJ, 193, 196
deterministic, 24
DOPTPRM, 198, 200
DRESP1, 14, 46, 196
DSCREEN, 196
Main Index

92
DTI UNITS, 14, 24, 44
durability, 3, 24
duty cycle, 35, 142, 24
duty cycle,events,load event, 144
E
elastic, 27
elastic-plastic correction, 115, 27
element definitions, 19
e-N analysis, 98, 146
e-N curve, 21
Endo, 86
endurance limit, 21, 117, 32
equivalent units, 35, 39, 63
event processing, 32
events, 35, 38
F
factor of safety analysis, 30, 47, 92, 127, 162,
166, 171
fail safe, 8, 32
failure criterion, 98, 32
fast analysis, 88
Fatemi-Socie, 21
fatigue, 3, 32
FATIGUE case control, 14, 16
fatigue concentration factor, 32
fatigue cutoff, 21
fatigue ductility exponent/coefficient, 21
fatigue element definitions, 19
fatigue event, 38
fatigue limit, 33
fatigue loading, 35, 39
fatigue parameters, 30, 60, 111, 129, 194
fatigue properties, 27
fatigue response, 46
fatigue sequence, 35
fatigue strenght reduction factor, 27
fatigue strength exponent/coefficient, 21
fatigue units, 35, 39, 63, 42
finite element methods, 7
FKM mean stress, 34
FKM mean stress correction, 50
Fourier analysis, 33
fracture, 3, 33
fracture mechanics, 9
fracture mechanics triangle, 33
frequency domain, 34
FTGDEF, 14, 19
FTGEVNT, 14, 38
FTGLOAD, 14, 39
FTGPARM, 14, 30
FTGSEQ, 14, 35
G
Gaussian, 34
geometry information, 4
Gerber mean stress, 34, 89, 34
Gerber mean stress correction, 47
global constraints, 191
Goodman mean stress, 34, 89, 34
Goodman mean stress correction, 45
H
Haigh, 24, 34, 65, 70, 35
high cycle fatigue, 116, 35
Hoffmann-Seeger, 29
Hoffman-Seeger notch correction, 35
hypertext, 10
hysteresis, 36
I
interpolation, 36
inverse Fourier transform, 36
irregularity factor, 41
item codes, 47
K
Kf, 27
k-solution, 11, 42
L
life, 42
life prediction methods, 6
life response, 46
linear elastic fracture mechanics, 42
linear superposition, 131
load condition, 144
load event, 35
Main Index
93 INDEX
load sequence, 35, 144
loading, 35
loading information, 4
load-strain relation, 10
local strain, 3
local strain analysis, 98, 146
local strain method, 42
low cycle fatigue, 116, 42
M
Masings hypothesis, 116
material cut-off, 42
material generation, 42
material information, 4
material properties, 21
derived, 59
material scatter, 90
material S-N curve, 56, 58, 44
material tests, 106
MATFTG, 14, 21
Matsuishi, 86
mean stress, 21, 116, 45
mean stress correction, 30, 34, 61, 65, 80, 89,
111, 45
Miners constant, 87, 53
Miners rule, 23
modal analysis, 160
modal stress recovery, 166, 171
model units, 44, 58, 102, 129
monotonic material properties, 4, 53
Morrow, 51
Morrow mean stress, 34, 116, 53
multiaxial stress state, 53
multiple loads, 126, 142, 160
N
narrow band signal, 54
Neuber, 27
Neuber notch correction, 54
Neubers rule, 115
non-proportional loading, 54
notch correction, 10, 28, 30, 119, 54
O
offset, 54, 58
offsets, 39, 63, 84
optimization, 46, 190
optimization parameters, 200
output requests, 16
P
Palmgren-Miner damage summation law, 88
Palmgren-Miner rule, 87
Paris equation, 54
PDF (probablility density function), 86
peak-valley extraction, 30, 88, 151, 54
performance, 50
PFTG, 14, 27
plastic limit load correction, 59
plastic load limit correction, 54
plasticity, 65, 98, 55
plasticity correction, 30
power spectral density (PSD), 55
probabalistic nature of fatigue, 111
probabilistic nature of fatigue, 90
probability density function (PDF), 56
probablistic, 55
proportional loading, 56
Q
quasi-static stress recovery, 162
R
rainflow, 30, 88, 151
rainflow cycle counting, 80, 85, 115, 56
random vibration, 56
range, 65, 57
reading, 90
reference location, 58, 57
references, 84, 90
regression analysis, 61, 112, 57
residual stress, 58
response, 46
responses, 196
responses,damage, 197
responses,life, 197
responses,safety factor, 197
Main Index

94
results, 64, 85, 114, 151, 197
root mean square (rms), 58
r-ratio, 21, 34, 61, 68, 56
S
safe life, 8, 58
safety factor, 30, 47, 92, 127, 162, 166, 171
sample rate, 58, 59
scale factor, 47, 92, 127, 162, 166, 171, 58
scale factors, 30, 39, 63, 84
Seeger-Heuler, 59
sequence, 35, 144
shot peening, 118
similitude, 57, 109
Smith Watson Topper mean stress, 34
Smith-Watson Topper, 52
S-N analysis, 52, 80, 126, 160, 190
S-N curve, 21, 68
constant life, 70
constant mean, 66
constant r-ratio, 68
S-N method, 3
spectral moments, 61
standard error, 90
standard error of log(e), 21
static offsets, 39
strain, 119
strain combination, 61
strain hardening, 105, 62
strain softening, 105, 64
strain vs. stress, 64, 71
strain-life, 3, 21
strain-life analysis, 98, 146
strain-life curve, 107, 62
strain-life relation, 10
stress combination, 60, 111, 64
stress concentration, 4, 32, 67
stress intensity, 67
stress range, 57
stress range intercept, 21
stress vs. strain, 119, 64, 71
stress/strain combination, 30, 33
stress-life, 3, 21
stress-life analysis, 52, 80, 126, 160, 190
stress-life curve, 68
stress-life vs. strain-life, 109
stress-strain relationship, 70
stress-strain tracking, 116
STW mean stress, 70
superposition of loads, 131
surface conditions, 117
surface finish/treatment, 27, 117, 72
surface resolved stress, 76
T
TABLED1, 39, 62, 130, 149, 171
TABLEM1, 22, 59
TABLFTG, 14, 42
time history compression, 30, 88, 151, 76
total life, 3, 11, 79
total life analysis, 52, 80, 126, 160, 190
transfer function, 79
transient modal analysis, 160
U
UDNAME, 14, 43
uniaxial stress, 80
unit conversion, 24
units, 44, 58, 102, 129
using strains, 119
UTS(Ultimate Tensile Strength), 21
W
Wang Brown, 21
white noise, 80
wide band, 80
Y
YS(Yield Strength), 21
Main Index

Nastran 2013 Doc Embedded Fatigue

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Nastran 2013 Doc Embedded Fatigue

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

MSC Nastran 2013

Nastran Embedded Fatigue

About this Book

List of Nastran Books

The Fatigue Analysis Five Box Trick

Life Prediction Methods

Finite Element Analysis Methods

Life Estimation Process

When to Use Which Method

FATIGUE Case Control

Fatigue Element Definitions

Analysis Model Units

Modal Transient Method

Potrebbero piacerti anche